Random Article Summary #63

In the case of Wansboro v. DPP and anor, the Irish Supreme Court made a ruling that allows for 'leapfrog' appeals directly to the Supreme Court from the High Court in certain circumstances. This ruling can be applied when the Court of Appeal has already made a clear decision on the issues brought up by the applicant. Mr. Wansboro appeared in court for various driving offences and received concurrent suspended sentences. However, after pleading guilty to another offence, the court activated the suspended sentences and imposed a new sentence of five and a half years in prison. Mr. Wansboro's request for a judicial review of a Circuit Court order was denied by Justice Faherty. The court determined that there was no violation of due process, as Mr. Wansboro did not show any intention to appeal either the reactivation of his suspended sentence or the triggering offense at the time. Therefore, he could not benefit from the decision in the Moore case. The Supreme Court granted Mr. Wansboro's request to appeal directly from the High Court due to exceptional circumstances and the fact that two previous cases had already followed the same reasoning. The Court determined that the Constitutional threshold had been met and decided to grant leapfrog leave in order to obtain clarity on the effect of a previous decision. The ruling in the Wansboro v. DPP case has been referenced in recent determinations to grant leave to appeal in two other cases, Petecel v. Minister for Social Protection and Data Protection Commissioner v. Facebook Ireland Ltd.