The prosecution of thousands of people, mainly for road traffic offences, is expected to go ahead after a Supreme Court decision upheld the appointment of District Court clerks.
The District Court system was thrown into chaos after the High Court ruled last month that the appointments of 185 court clerks responsible for issuing summonses were not valid. The cases affected included drink-driving summonses and barring orders.
One legal expert said last night that most of the cases could be reinstated. However, some cases - mostly traffic offences - which had occurred more than six months ago would have to be dropped.
The summonses were undermined following a High Court ruling dealing with the appointment of a District Court clerk. Mr Justice McCracken ruled the clerk should have been appointed by the Minister for Justice.
The High Court case arose when lawyers for a man charged with a road traffic offence argued that the clerk should have been appointed by the Minister under the 1926 Courts Act. The clerk had been appointed by a civil servant.
Following the McCracken ruling, the Minister for Justice, Mr O'Donoghue, appointed all 185 District Court clerks.
The High Court ruling was appealed by the State to the Supreme Court.
A legal source said the Supreme Court decision was a return to the status quo, with clerks being appointed by Department officials rather than by the Minister.
