High Court will consider query over prosecution of Offaly driver

Judge at Tullamore District Court seeks High Court opinion on issue arising from Rhode motorist accused of having no NCT

Published 8th Jul 2026, 16:30 BST Judge at Tullamore District Court seeks opinion of High Court | Tribune Pictures Judge at Tullamore District Court seeks High Court opinion on issue arising from Rhode motorist accused of having no NCT Sign up to our Offaly Live newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know you can manage your profile, and explore all of the available newsletters from Offaly Live within your account.

A DECISION at the District Court in Tullamore will result in numerous prosecutions being put on hold.

Judge Andrew Cody has stated a case to the High Court in relation to the admissibility of certificates of posting used by the gardai when fixed charge penalty notices (FCPNs) are issued.

The case centres on the prosecution of William Murphy (68), Hill View, Rhode, Co Offaly, who was summonsed by Garda Kieran Fitzpatrick for driving without an NCT certificate at Dublin Road, Edenderry on August 2 last year.

Driving without a valid NCT is a fixed charge offence (liable for what is commonly known as an on the spot fine).

READ NEXT: Internationally acclaimed sculptor will create artwork in Offaly village

At a previous hearing Mr Murphy challenged whether he had ever been served with the required FCPN.

Judge Cody dismissed the prosecution on the basis that evidence from the gardai in relation to a certificate of posting was inadmissible.

The judge sought a submission from the DPP by May 26 on what he said was a “significant” issue and indicated his intention to refer the matter to the High Court.

He was told at Tullamore District Court on May 27 that the DPP was seeking a further two months before it made a submission.

Judge Cody said the issue before the court was affecting hundreds of thousands of fixed charge penalty notices every year and it had first been raised by him in March.

The DPP already had nearly three months to address the issue and now wanted “five months in total”. “They seem to be dragging their feet,” he remarked.

READ NEXT: Uisce Éireann crews working to repair burst watermain in Offaly town

Today (Wednesday, July 8), Sandra Mahon, Offaly state solicitor, appeared for the DPP and said the case had been filed on Monday.

Judge Cody thanked Ms Mahon and Mr Murphy's barrister, David Nugent, BL (instructed by Adam Dodd, solicitor) for their help and signed the case stated.

Because a ruling is now awaited from the High Court, he adjourned Mr Murphy's summons to February 3 next year for mention, pending the outcome of the case stated.

“It's unlikely we'll have a decision before the end of the year,” the judge remarked.

In May when he announced his judgment on the prosecution of Mr Murphy, Judge Cody said his decision concerned the interpretation of section 38 of the Road Traffic Act 2010, in particular the admissibility of a certificate of posting provided pursuant to section 38 (2) of the act by a company called Tico Mail Works Limited.

He said that section provides that “a document purporting to be a certificate or receipt of posting or delivery issued by or on behalf of An Post or another postal service is admissible in evidence as proof of the posting or delivery”.

Another section of the act provides that a prosecution cannot take place unless a fixed charge notice in relation to the alleged offence has been served and a further section “establishes a presumption that such service has occurred where there is proof of posting”.

Judge Cody said: “At the core of this case is the question of whether an entity that is merely authorised to provide postal services may issue such a certificate, or whether the provision is properly confined to a postal service that actually performs the function of posting or delivering fixed charge notices.”

When the prosecution came before the court in March Garda Fitzpatrick gave evidence and was cross-examined in relation to the certificate of posting.

The garda said the FCPN was delivered by An Post and tendered the certificate in evidence.

The judge said that when he was questioned regarding Tico, Garda Fitzpatrick said he believed it to be part of An Post.

Judge Cody said counsel for the accused pointed out that the certificate should have been issued by the postal service provider rather than Tico.

Garda Fitzpatrick was unable to clarify this issue, the judge said, and the case continued at a hearing in April where a representative of the Garda's fixed charge office, Garda Jarlath Hardiman, explained that data files are sent to Tico, who print and prepare the notices, after which An Post collects and delivers them via regular post.

Garda Hardiman could not confirm whether Tico or An Post constituted the postal service provider. He indicated that Declan McCann, Tico’s client relationship manager, could address the issue.

Mr McCann gave evidence at a further hearing on May 5 and Judge Cody quoted him as saying: “Tico do not deliver any post. We hand it over to An Post and they deliver it”.

Mr McCann said Tico pay for postage like anyone else but do not deliver any post and give it to An Post and “it is the same as when you go into the post office”.

When it was put to Mr McCann that “Tico are a Registered Postal Provider but they don’t post anything”, he replied, “That’s correct”.

The certificate of postage is printed by them as part of the prosecution pack sent to the presenting sergeant prior to a case coming to court.

A certificate of postage from Tico in relation to the prosecution of Mr Murphy was presented to the court and on it Tico is said to be a “Registered Postal Service Provider”.

Judge Cody said An Post sets a benchmark as the national postal provider in that it physically collects, sorts, transports, and delivers mail.

He said “another postal service” must be interpreted in the same class or category and must actually perform postal functions

He added that the “postal service” contemplated by the law must be an independent entity, and not one that is contractually or operationally connected with An Garda Síochána.

“This is to preserve the integrity and fairness of the evidential process.”

READ NEXT: Deer population in Offaly is out of control, unsustainable and dangerous

He decided that Tico does not provide postal services within the meaning of the legislation and it therefore cannot issue a certificate of posting or delivery.

Judge Cody said he was seeking the High Court's opinion on a number of questions, including the meaning of “another postal service”, the status of Tico Mail, the admissibility of a certificate of posting, and if a prosecution cannot be maintained when there is no proof of service of a fixed charge notice.

He estimated the matter would affect about 300,000 fixed charge notices each year.

He told Sergeant Richard Thornton to inform the DPP of the court's intention and said: “I ask that some urgency and importance be given to this and it's not acceptable that it takes five months for them to make a submission on it.”

He also acceded to a request from Mr Nugent that Mr Murphy be granted legal aid in what counsel said was “an exceptional case”.

Judge Cody said he would not normally grant legal aid for a case involving NCT but this one had raised a very serious issue affecting hundreds of thousands of fixed charge notices so he had no difficulty in granting the aid.