S v Director of Public Prosecutions (Approved)

             This judgment is delivered in respect of an application to restrain a criminal prosecution on the grounds of prosecutorial delay.� It is contended that a fair trial is not now possible in consequence of the death of one of the intended prosecution witnesses.� The argument here being that this witness would have been available had the criminal prosecution been brought to trial within a reasonable period.

             The criminal prosecution is pending before the Circuit Criminal Court.� The applicant for judicial review is one of two co-accused.� For ease of exposition, the applicant will be referred to throughout this judgment as " the accused ".�

             One of the intended prosecution witnesses died a number of years after the criminal proceedings had commenced.� The deceased had been the managing director of the company which operated the car dealership.� The accused contends that any actions on his part, which are now alleged to comprise criminal offences, were done with the knowledge of the managing director and that the latter " signed off on everything ".

             To avoid any risk of prejudicing the fairness of the pending criminal prosecution, which is to be heard by a jury, this judgment has been redacted.� The name and address of the accused have been omitted, and the circumstances of the alleged offences have been deliberately described in general terms.� Neither the name of nor the location of the car dealership has been identified.

             These reporting restrictions have been imposed pursuant to the court's common law power to ensure the integrity of the criminal trial.� (See, generally, Gilchrist v. Sunday Newspapers Ltd [2017] IESC 18, [2017] 2 IR 284).� The reporting restrictions seek to strike a balance between the constitutional right to a fair trial and the constitutional imperative that justice should generally be administered in public.�