The Gazette 1982

g a z e t t e

april 1982

and a right of entry to moderate the speakers' passions and so prevent such a breach was lawful. What constitutes a breach of the peace has recently been defined as:- " . . . . whenever harm is actually done or is likely to be done to a person or, in his presence, to his property, or a person is in fear of being so harmed through an assault, an affray, or riot, unlawful assembly or other disturbance." 64 Glanville Williams considers that the definition of a breach of the peace must always envisage danger. 65 Those powers exist only where a breach of the peace is committed in the presence of the person making the arrest; or where the arrestor reasonably believes that such a breach will be committed in the immediate future by the person arrested, although he has not yet committed any breach; or where a breach has been committed and it is reasonably believed that a renewal of it is threatened. 64 It is also recognised in this jurisdiction that it is lawful to temporarily deprive a citizen of his liberty to prevent an imminent breach of the peace. 66 Finally, for the power to act to exist, the breach of the peace or anticipation of it must occur in the presence of the constable or someone who directs him to arrest as their agent. In this context present means "perceived through the senses". 67 Thus hearing a blow and screams in the darkness is enough, or even under the American prohibition cases the smell of illegally distilled whiskey or illegally smoked opium. 68 Footnotes: 1. This article was originally prepared as a paper delivered to a seminar of state solicitors held on 14th November, 1981, under the auspices of the Attorney-General, Peter Sutherland S.C., and the Chief State Solicitor, Louis J. Dockery. Throughout the article, reference is made to "police", "policeman", "police constable" and "constable" as indicative of the common law origins of the powers being discussed. Reference is made to "garda" and "gardai" where the context is specifically Irish. 2. (1823) 107 E.R. 108. 3. At [1966] Crim. L.R. p. 369. 4. 9 February, 1978 — High Court — unreported. 5. D.P.P. v. Lynch, 5 February, 1981 — Supreme Court — unreported. 6. See, Weeks v. U.S. (1914) 232 U.S. 383. 7. For a discussion on this see; Leigh, Police Powers, Butterworths, 1975, Ch 11 etseq. 8. (1765) 19 State Tr. 1029. 9. See judgment of Lord Parker C.J. in R. v. Waterfield [1964] 1 Q.B. 164. 10. See Megarry V.C. in Malone v. M.P.C. (No. 2) [1979] 2 All E.R. 633, re Telephone tapping — probably a breach of the undis- closed general right of privacy here. 11. See Ghani v. Jones [1970) 1 Q.B. 693. (Part 2 of this article will appear in the June Gazette).

17. R. v. Lockley (1864) 4 F.&F. and, Reed v. Wastie [1972] Crim L.R. 221. 18. Lindley v. Rutter( 1981) 72 Cr.App.R. 1. 19. Following Leigh v. Cole (1853) 6 Cox C.C. 329. 20. Per Bowen L.J. cited by Hanna J. in Lynch v. Fitzgerald (No. 2) [1938] I.R. 382. 21. See Swales v. Cox [1981] 1 All E.R. 1115 at 1118. 22. [1962] V.R. 30. 23. See Leigh, supra, footnote 7, at pp. 43 & 47 for other cases from the Commonwealth. 24. Malicious Damage Act 1861, Section 61. 25. Re Emergency Powers Bill [1977] I.R. 150 at p. 173. 26. As it does in the U.S.; see Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436, not followed here in D.P.P. y. Pringle — July 1981 — C.C. A. unreported. 27. State (Harrington) v. Garvey — 14 December 1976 — High Court — unreported. 28. D.P.P. v. Doyle [1977] I.R. 353. 29. State (McCann) v. Herlihy, Irish Independent — 30 October 1976 — High Court. 30. [1978] I.R. 131. 31. Dunne v. Clinton [1930] I.R. 366; People v. O'Loughlin [1979] I.R. 85. 32. 17 December 1980 — Supreme Court — unreported. 33. Walsh J. cited Ireland v. the U.K. 29 April 1976, Series A. no 25. 34. R. v. Laemstag [1911]2 AWE.R.-, and,R. v. Holmes [ 1981] 2 All E.R. 615. 35. In re O'Laighleis \ 1960] I.R. 93. 36. D.P.P. v. Walsh — 18 January 1980 — Supreme Court — unreported. 37. SeeKenlin v. Gardiner [1961] 2 Q.B. 510. 38. Bro. Ab. Trespass 184 T.9 E.4 26 b pi 35. 39. In the U.S. the power does exist; see Perkins (1940) 25 Iowa L.Rev at p.230. 40. But see Russell on Crime, 12th Ed, 1964, p.444. 41. Wiltshire v. Barrett [1965] 2 All E.R. 271, at p. 275, per Lord Denning M.R. 42. Ledwith v. Roberts [1937] 1 K.B. 232. 43. Barnard v. Gorman [1941] A.C. 378. 44. SeeSandes, Criminal Lawand Procedure in Eire, 3rdEd(1951), pp 42-49 listing the statutory power of arrest. 45. These proposals are by Professor D. A. Thomas of the London School of Economics, as set forth in a comprehensive article in [1966] Crim. L.R. 639. 46. Bullen & Leake, 3rd Ed. (1868) p. 795. 47. Lister v. Perryman ( 1870) L.R. 4H.L. 521. 48. D.P.P. v. Lynch — February, 1982 — Supreme Court — unreported. 49. Glanville Williams, [1954] Crim.L.R., p. 416. 50. [1970] A.C. 942. See also D.P.P. v. Raymond Walsh — 17 January 1980 — Supreme Court — unreported. 51. (1870) L.R. 4 H.L. 251. 52. Isaacs v. Brand (1817) 2 Stark. 167. 53. People v. Guertins (1923) 224 Mich.8, 195, N.W. 561. 54. Hogg v. Ward (1858) 3 H. and N.417. 55. Glanville Williams, [1954] Crim. L.R. at p.413 thinks otherwise but see Koechlin v. Waugh and Hamilton (1957) 118 C.C.C. 24. 56. [1977] I.R. 336 at 346/7. 57. [1944] 1 All E.R. 326. 58. (1980) 71 Cr. App. R. See also/?, v. Hogan 8 C.&P. 171. 59. Albert v. Lavin (1981) 73 Cr. App. R. 60. (1867) 17 Ir. Com. Law Rep. 1. 61. [1898] 2 I.R. 167, 192. 62. 10 L.R.Ir. 285; 14 L.R.Ir. 105. 63. [1935] 2 K.B. 249. 64. Per Watkins L.J. in R. v. Eroll Howell, (1981) 71 Cr.App.R. 31 at p. 37. 65. See "Arrest for Breach of the Peace" [1954] Crim.L.R. 578; and, for the Scottish Law, see Rajfaeli v. Heathly [1949] S.C. (J) 101. 66. See Connors v. Pearson [1921] 2 I.R. 51; and John M. Kelly, The Irish Constitution, 1980, p.411 et seq. 67. State v. McAlfee (1890) 107 N.C. 812, 12 S.E. 435, and Dilger v. Commonwealth (1889) 88 Ky. 550, 11 S.W. 651. 68. For statutory breaches of the peace see Dublin Police Act, 1842 (Cap. 24) s. XIV which gives a power of arrest to the police.

12. Glanville Williams, in [1954] Crim. L.R. at p.6. 13. Grainger v. Hill (1838) 5 Scott 561 at 575.

14. R. v. Long (1836) 7 C. & P. 341. 15. (1974) 60 Cr. App. R at p. 38.

16. See Blackstone Vol. IV, Ch. 21 S.3 p. 386 of Ed. 23; and, Hale 11 82,83 reformed in England by s.3 (1) of the Criminal Law Act, 1967.

82