A man who claimed the District Court should not have ordered his arrest because he was before the High Court on the same day has lost a legal challenge to the warrant for his arrest.
In 2014, the man brought a High Court case challenging the constitutionality of various provisions of the 2001 Sex Offenders Act. That case was listed for hearing in the High Court on November 25th, 2014.
A few days earlier, he was arrested on public order offences and bailed to appear before Swords District Court in Dublin on November 26th.
The High Court constitutional challenge did not open on November 25th because there was no judge available to hear it and it was put back to the next day, November 26th.
Constitutional case
His lawyer appeared in the District Court that day and asked the judge to remand him in his absence due to the fact the constitutional case was before the High Court the same day.
He would be required to give evidence in that case, it was claimed.
Gardaí, who had refused to consent to an adjournment because they had not been given any documents to corroborate his claim he was in another court, applied for a warrant for his arrest. The man had also previously been the subject of 31 arrest warrants.
The District Judge issued a bench warrant for his arrest on November 26th.
In his separate High Court challenge to the warrant, the man argued it was not physically possible for him to be simultaneously in both courts.
The District Judge acted in excess of jurisdiction and contrary to the principles of natural and constitutional justice, it was claimed.
Rejecting his challenge, Mr Justice Robert Eagar said the District Judge acted lawfully, within jurisdiction and proportionately.
He said there was no evidence it would have been impossible for the man to attend to answer his bail on November 26th as he was not required to attend the High Court, he said.
Even so, he could have attended the District Court in the morning and travelled to the city centre “in ample time” to give evidence in the High Court, he added.
