The Gazette 1974

F'actice, one would find that, apart from the possible ««suitability of the venue named, there would be many a Pplications for adjournment before the Circuit Court, resultant waste of time, in relation to juries, witnesses, ta te Counsel and State Solicitors without any real ad- v antage being gained, either by the accused or from the P°int of view of the public convenience or economy. i his recommendation is supported by the Society, .^owever, to pay the accused's travelling expenses only merely a small contribution towards the overall costs Penses of the accused person. Accedence of Criminal Trials over Civil Actions s P a r a g r a ph 134 relates to the drawback in the existing Trtem, whereby the criminal trials have precedence over a lv il cases. It is believed that there is no statutory «"lority for this arrangement but it is part of the fisting system and does not create any serious problem. pcasionally there may be an exceedingly heavy /'«final list, but where that occurs, the Circuit Court l^dge will arrange the criminal list in co-operation with e County Registrar and the local practitioners, with view to having the criminal trials disposed of first, ^ nich is as it should be. If this arrangement should su c ' v d c a s e s n o t being reached, then the earlier ' Sgestion namely, that the arrears arising on the civil «c should be dealt with by a temporary Circuit Court to K ' n o t a s s i S n e d t o a n V s P e c i f i c Circuit, seems b e a more appropriate procedure to adopt. Lis ting of Cases At is indicated that the suggested recommendations ^ould enable civil cases to be reached on appointed c Vs. In this respect in many Circuits through the lo *ntry, the County Registrar, in co-operation with cal practitioners and with the Judge, will list cases for P e cific days during the sittings and this is feasible and a c a n E e achieved with local co-operation c n cl with little loss of Judge's time and with great t L ny cnience to witnesses and litigants. It is appreciated a t in some areas no day to day list is prepared. > ra nsfer to Central Criminal Courts f e State's right of application to have a trial trans- tiir!^ to the Central Criminal Court has from time to e caused public unease. Any enlargement of the right ^ transfer is not generally in the public interest and °uld not in any way achieve any of the objectives j^ e ntioned. An impossible and difficult position would v created if the transfer of cases was permitted to any nue in the State. If transfers could be made to any t , n ues in the State or if there was any enlargement of e present right of transfer, it would be impossible, P a rt from other considerations to make any clear assess- j n e nt °f the volume of work which might arise or exist a ny specific area from time to time. The position ^°uld be uncertain apart from the extra work which °uld be involved for the office of any County Regis- w h o might find that cases from any area were being -jforned for hearing at a pending Court in his County. t 0 • s r t gg e s t i on that a High Court Judge be permitted c . Slt in the Circuit Court for the disposal of indictable J^me is noted. It is difficult to understand why this ^gestion should be necessary, unless there is not a e T e travel for Accused Persons

sufficient number of Judges available in the Circuit Court.

Change of Venue The recommendation in paragraph 137 suggesting that where there is more than one Circuit Court venue in any County, that notice of trial should issue return- able for one venue only, with liberty to apply before the Court commences to the County Registrar for a transfer. This would again create utter confusion from the point of view of endeavouring to fix a day to day list of cases for hearing at the particular venue. In addition a County Registrar would have the problem of endeavouring to fix venues and could become in- volved in contentious applications leading up to the opening day of the Circuit Court with no one knowing exactly what the ultimate position in relation to the listing of cases might be. Confining Criminal Circuit Court to Limited Venues In relation to the suggested reduction in number and the limitation of locations for the Circuit Criminal Court through the country, no practitioner has approved of this recommendation and all are opposed to it. Reducing the venues and placing the new venues in the areas suggested in the Report, will result in very considerable public inconvenience, excessive travelling expenses, a very considerable loss of time for all parties involved. The State Solicitors involved, the Gardai from the areas from which the crime originates, the State witnesses, the accused, his witnesses (to include pro- fessional witnesses) will be obliged to travel very considerable distances to the appropriate venue and will lose considerable valuable time in awaiting the dis- posal of the case. Apart from this practical objection there is the important problem of an accused person finding legal representation at the venue for the hearing of the charge, especially in cases where an accused resided perhaps far away. The accused is entitled to have his legal advisers re- present him at the District Court preliminary investiga- tion and also at the trial. There are few practitioners in the country who could undertake a defence in a criminal trial in the circumstances suggested knowing the time which would be involved in travelling to a centre many miles away. A Solicitor in the area where the venue is located may not be prepared to take on the defence of an accused person since he may not have dealt with the depositions in the District Court. An accused standing trial in his local area will find that his solicitor will be prepared to take on the defence of his case, even though he may not be fully remunerated. A State Solicitor could find that his presence would be required at the same time not only in the far distant Circuit Criminal Court but also in his local Circuit Court or in some District Court within his County, thus giving rise to adjournment of cases, through his inability to attend each Court. Circuit Court Offices The recommendation contained in paragraph 139 that each County should have a County Registrar is fully supported. In fact, it is essential that the existing position in this respect should remain and all County Registrars' Offices should at all times be adequately staffed to enable the office to provide efficiently the many services which fall upon it. 159