A welcome triumph for common sense in court

THE Supreme Court’s dismissal of the challenge by a Romanian man, who claimed that his drinkdriving prosecution should be stopped as he had not been supplied with a breath-alcohol statement in Irish, as well as in English, is an all-too-rare triumph for common sense. It has implications for more than 1,000 drink-driving prosecutions that have been put on hold, so clarity on the issue is welcome. The rules around the use of the breathalyser and the intoxilyser, and how they are applied and interpreted, have been proved to be needlessly complex. Lawyers, gardaí and the courts have gone back and forth and loopholes and lacunae have been found to either make or break a case.

The case hinged on Sections 13 of the Road Traffic Act 2010 and whether or not a print-out is a “duly completed” document for use in evidence if it is not printed in both English and Irish. As Ms Justice O’Malley pointed out, the omission of the Irish part did not materially affect the substance of the document. She also noted that, under the 2010 Act, a “duly completed” breath-alcohol statement “shall, until the contrary is shown, be sufficient evidence in any proceedings”.

While, strictly speaking, an Irish-language version should have been included, what really matters is that all of the required information was present.

That a form could be deemed invalid as it was not also printed in Irish should not be deemed more important than the evidence or information submitted in any case.