Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-wxvwp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T01:12:28.737Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Irish exclusionary rule after DPP v JC

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Clare Leon and
Tony Ward
Tony Ward*
Affiliation:
University of Hull
*
Dr Tony Ward (corresponding author), Law School, University of Hull, Hull HU6 7RX, UK. Email: A.Ward@hull.ac.uk
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

This commentary updates the paper ‘Excluding evidence (or staying proceedings) to vindicate rights in Irish and English law’ by analysing the recent decision of the Supreme Court of Ireland in DPP v JC. It argues that although the court has relaxed the exclusionary rule in one major respect, it has strengthened it in others, and that Ireland's approach to unconstitutionally or illegally obtained evidence remains very different from that of England and Wales.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Legal Studies , Volume 35 , Issue 4 , December 2015, pp. 590 - 593
Copyright
Copyright © Society of Legal Scholars 2015 

Footnotes

1. [2015] IESC 31.

2. [1965] IR 142.

3. [1990] 2 IR 110.

4. [2012] 2 IR 266.

5. [2015] IESC 50.

6. [1977] IR 55.

7. T Ward and C Leon ‘Excluding evidence (or staying proceedings) to vindicate rights in Irish and English law’ (2015) 35(4) Legal Stud 571–589. See text to nn 37–39.

8. DPP v Balfe [1998] IR 50 at 58–59.

9. See http://humanrights.ie/civil-liberties/dpp-v-jc-initial-observations-on-the-exclusionary-rule-case/ (accessed 2 May 2015). But cf Clarke J at para 50.

10. Constitution of Ireland, Preamble and Arts 6.1, 40.6.1, 41.2.1, 42.3.2, 42.5, 43.2, 45.2.

11. Finnis, J Natural Law and Natural Rights (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1980) pp 210–221.