David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 5:

In page 4, to delete lines 25 to 37, and in page 5, to delete lines 1 to 3.

This proposes the deletion from the Bill as initiated of amendments that had been proposed to be made to subsections (10) and (14) of section 1 of the Courts (No. 3) Act 1986. Subsection (10) of the 1986 Act provides that in the case of a summons that has been issued by electronic means, a true copy of the summons shall be evidence of the summons concerned. In the Bill as initiated it had been proposed to also apply this provision to a summons created in an automatic manner under the new subsection (2A). Amendment No. 5 proposes that subsection (10) will remain unaltered and that consequently it will continue to apply only to summonses issued by electronic means in accordance with section 1(2) of the 1986 Act. This alternative approach arises from further work of the Advisory Counsel and Parliamentary Counsel and flows from subsection (2A), whereby every printed document in respect of the same alleged offence is to be considered the summons.

Subsection (14) of the 1986 Act provides for definitions of various terms used in the Act. In the Bill as initiated it had been proposed to add a definition of the term "document" and amend the definition of the term "true copy". The definition of the term "document" was proposed to clarify that a document includes electronic material or electronic information. Within the Act of 1986, a summons is referred to as a document so the new definition was intended to have the effect of reflecting the issue of summonses as part of a batch of electronic data transmitted from the relevant court office to a print service provider acting on behalf of the Garda Síochána. It is no longer proposed that this drafting approach shall be followed in the Bill. This change arises from further work of the Advisory Counsel and Parliamentary Counsel and arises from the new subsection (2A), whereby every printed document in respect of the same alleged offence is considered to be the summons. The term "true copy" is currently defined in the 1986 Act with regard to a summons that has been issued electronically as a reproduction in writing of the summons certified by the prosecutor as being a true copy thereof. In the Bill as initiated, it had been proposed to amend this definition. However, as I previously explained, under the revised drafting approach, every printed document under the new automatic system is to be considered the summons. Consequently, the matter of a true copy of the summons does not arise under the new and more straightforward approach.