In the Irish Courts
| DOI | 10.1177/002201837804200307 |
| Published date | 01 July 1978 |
| Date | 01 July 1978 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
In
the
Irish
Courts
Comments
on
Cases
COURT OF APPEAL IN NORTHERN IRELAND
TIME LIMIT
FOR
CASE STATED
Dolan v. 0
'Hara
In MontrealStreet Rail
Co.
v. Normandin (1917, A.
C.
170), it
was stated that
"the
question whether provisions in a statute are direct-
ory or imperative has very frequently arisen in this country, but it
hasbeen saidthat no general rule can be laid down." Several distinctions
have, however, been taken. Thus, where the statute relates to a public
duty and the person likely to be injured by the non-performance
of
that duty within a fixed time has no control over the persons entrusted
with the duty, the courts are apt to declare the duty directory and to
claim the discretionary right to extend the time. This is so, for example,
where the duty is laid on an inferior court and that court has failed to
act within the statutory period. This principle is usually put into effect
where the statutory provisions relate to procedure, but, per contra,
provisions concerning jurisdiction are usually construed as absolute.
What, then, is the position
of
a person who is aggrieved by the decision
of
a lower court and who has called on that court to state a case, but
is required to transmit that case to the higher tribunal within a fixed
period? That was the question which was raised in Dolan v. 0
'Hara
(1975, N, I. 125), where the appellant had been convicted
of
driving
amotor car while disqualified and had asked the magistrate to state
a case on two points
of
law which he had raised as part
of
his defence.
That request was made in May,
but,
following his further request for
amendment, the case did not reach the Court
of
Appeal until October.
Had
that
court jurisdiction to hear the appeal?
An unreported decision of the court in Davis v. Davisin 1972 was
to the effect that the statutory provisions are merely directory, so
164
To continue reading
Request your trial