Here, the Court held that the Bail Act 1997 is not a code providing a full statement of the law on bail, replacing the full and original jurisdiction of the High Court or the jurisdiction of the court seised with the trial of an offence: it provides new statutory grounds for the refusal of bail and amends the existing common law on bail.
Background
Roche was awaiting trial for an offence of violent disorder. The High Court had previously granted him bail and subsequently revoked it for breaching the conditions. He later applied to and was granted bail by the District Court, which was later revoked for breach of conditions. His case was remitted to Dublin Circuit Criminal Court, where Judge Ring granted bail on the same conditions as the previous High Court order: residence at a specified address, a 7 pm to 7 am curfew, signing daily at a named Garda station, staying out of Ballymun and no contact with a co-acused. On a later court date, Judge Ring allowed him a temporary variation in conditions to allow him go on holiday to Portugal for six days. One condition was that he would call to the Garda station on his return journey from the airport and surrender his passport.
Roche cut his holiday short, he did not call to the Garda station on his return, and he did not return to the residence specified in the bail conditions. The Garda dealing with the case applied to the Circuit Court for an arrest warrant for the breaches of the bail conditions. Judge Ring revoked bail. She held that the conditions of bail resumed immediately when Roche returned to Ireland therefore he had breached the conditions. Roche applied to the High Court for a habeus corpus order claiming he was unlawfully detained. He claimed that he had not breached the conditions of bail, as the alleged breaches took place during the period of variation of the conditions.
Roche argued that the Bail Act 1997 was a codification of the law on bail and Judge Ring had acted outside her jurisdiction, as the Bail Act does not give the Circuit Court jurisdiction to revoke bail. The High Court rejected that argument and Roche’s application for habeas corpus, stating that the courts possess a common law power to revoke bail. Judge Ring relaxed the bail conditions for a particular purpose, and once that purpose was abandoned, full bail conditions applied. Roche appealed to the Supreme Court.
Charleton J wrote the judgment for the Court. He quoted from Walsh J in The People (AG) v O’Callaghan, who outlined the history of the courts’ common law powers to grant and revoke bail. He also referred to a Law Reform Commission report which stated that Ireland did not have a comprehensive bail statute, leaving bail “governed largely by the common law”. Judge Ring did therefore have jurisdiction to revoke Roche’s bail. While also criticising his application for a habeas corpus order–rather than appealing or seeking judicial review of Judge Ring’s order–the Court rejected Roche’s appeal.
SCOIRLBLOG 
1 Comment