Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 166:

In page 109, to delete lines 14 to 18 and substitute the following: “(c) in subsection (3)—

(i) by the substitution of “Subject to subsection (3A), if a judge” for “If a judge”, and

(ii) by the substitution of “an offence under the Act of 2002, or an infringement, whether or not the infringement is criminal in nature, of relevant competition law, within the meaning of the Act of 2002,” for “an offence under the Act of 2002”,

and

(d) by the insertion of the following subsection after subsection (3):

“(3A) Where an authorised officer provides information on oath to a judge of the District Court for the purpose of a warrant being issued in relation to an inspection referred to in subsection (1)(d)—

(a) the information on oath so provided shall include—

(i) a statement to the effect that the information on oath is being provided in relation to an inspection referred to in subsection (1)(d), and

(ii) sufficient information to allow the judge of the District Court to discharge his or her functions under the Regulation of 2003,

(b) before issuing the warrant, the judge of the District Court shall—

(i) where the warrant would, if issued, authorise the authorised officer to exercise powers under subsection (2) in relation to any place or land other than that referred to in subparagraph (ii), including the home or private vehicle of a director, manager or any member of staff of an undertaking, have regard to the matters referred to in Article 21(3) of the Regulation of 2003, and

(ii) where the warrant would, if issued, authorise the authorised officer to exercise powers under subsection (2) in relation to any place or land of an undertaking or association of undertakings, have regard to the matters referred to in Article 20(8) of the Regulation of 2003,

and

(c) the judge of the District Court, shall, where he or she is satisfied as regards the matters referred to in Article 20(8) or 21(3) of the Regulation of 2003, as the case may be, issue a warrant authorising an authorised officer (accompanied by such other authorised officers or members of the Garda Síochána or both as provided for in subsection (5) of section 35) at any time or times within one month from the date of issue of the warrant, on production if so requested of the warrant, to enter and search the place or land using reasonable force where necessary, and exercise all or any of the powers conferred on an authorised officer under this section.”.”.

The purpose of the two amendments is to clarify how an authorised officer shall apply for a warrant and to give the competent authority a route to appeal where an application for a warrant to the District Court is refused. It was also necessary to include the requirement to undertake searches on foot of a warrant for competition matters for ComReg so that authorised officers of both agencies, when acting as competition authorities, are acting under the same powers and obligations.

There are two separate amendments as the relevant provisions are contained in the Competition and Consumer Protection Act 2014 for the CCPC, in the Communications Regulation Act 2002 for ComReg, and not in the Competition Act 2002.