Speeding drivers get away

Analysis of prosecutions at Nenagh District Court

Almost two-thirds of speeding prosecutions before Nenagh District Court did not proceed in 2024, according to analysis by The Journal Investigates.

Courts Service figures show speeding offences before the local court increased significantly over recent years, rising from 86 in 2021 to 451 in 2024. At the same time, the number of cases withdrawn, struck out or dismissed rose from 37 to 279. By 2024, almost 62% of speeding prosecutions before the court did not proceed.

The findings formed part of a nationwide analysis that found that almost one in every two speeding prosecutions before Irish district courts between 2021 and 2024 did not result in a conviction.

To better understand the reasons behind the figures, the Journal Investigates worked alongside local court reporters to monitor five sittings of Nenagh District Court during May. Reporters also monitored Ennis and Trim District Courts after analysis of national data identified all three as recording significantly higher rates of speeding cases being withdrawn, struck out or dismissed than the national average.

SNAPSHOT

The monitoring exercise was not intended to be representative of annual outcomes. Rather, it sought to provide a snapshot of the types of issues arising in speeding prosecutions and the reasons cases did not proceed.

The findings were compared against Letterkenny District Court, Co Donegal, which was selected as a comparator court because its overall outcomes broadly reflected average national trends.

Between 2021 and 2024, approximately 35% of a total of 639 speeding prosecutions before Letterkenny did not proceed, significantly lower than the rates recorded in Nenagh, Trim and Ennis.

The Journal had a reporter present in Nenagh court last month to observe speeding cases across five sittings.

This snapshot of what transpired in court showed that 52 speeding cases were listed before the court, with 34 resulting in a conviction - a far higher percentage than that across the 2021-2024 period. Of the remaining cases, eight were dismissed, five were struck out, and five were withdrawn. The total penalties issued relating to speeding cases amounted to €17,150, with an average penalty of €504.41 per conviction.

The highest penalties recorded in Nenagh last month were €600, issued to several individuals. It was also observed that the vast majority of defendants - 38 out of 52 - did not appear in court, while only seven cases were contested.

AVERAGE SPEED CAMERAS

Detection was dominated by Average Speed (AS) Cameras, specifically at Ballywilliam (22 cases) and Ballinahinch (21 cases), both of which are located near Birdhill on the M7, one on each side of the motorway.

The most common reason for dismissal was related to the Fixed Charge Penalty Notice (FCPN). In three instances, defendants claimed they never received the notice or there was an error in the paperwork. Elsewhere, two cases were dismissed due to identity-related issues. One involved a defendant discovering their registration plates had been cloned, while another involved a discrepancy where a photo showed a different driver than the one nominated.

The majority of dismissed cases, five out of eight, were actively contested by the defendant. One case was dismissed as the judge noted they had attempted to pay but said they never received word back regarding their efforts.

The cases dismissed included one in which a vehicle was recorded as being driven at more than 140kmph in a 120kmph zone on the M7, but with no appearance by the defendant and no reason recorded for the dismissal. Another case involved a vehicle recorded as travelling at over 130kmph on the M7, only for the defendant to tell the court he was surprised that his plates had been cloned and were on a different vehicle to his own.

Another case in which a vehicle was recorded as travelling at more than 130kmph on the M7 was dismissed after the court heard the FCPN had not been received. Another case on the same day, again involving alleged speed of over 130kmph, was also dismissed for a similar reason.

Regarding the five cases that were withdrawn, in all five the defendant did not appear in court and four of the cases were withdrawn due to a lack of specific evidence and speed data in the records.

One of those cases involved a vehicle allegedly travelling at a speed of 130kmph, with the registered letter returned - possibly indicating issues involving a summons. As for the five other cases that were struck out, some were due to alleged procedural errors, such as "error in paperwork" or a "returned letter," rather than a lack of evidence regarding the offence itself.

DIDN’T GET IT

Speaking to The Journal Investigates anonymously, one District Court judge said claims of non-receipt of penalty notices had become one of the most common explanations offered by speeding defendants. "The vast majority of people have latched onto saying that they did not receive the penalty notice," the judge said. The judge suggested the use of registered post could potentially reduce disputes over whether motorists had been properly notified.

Five of the seven cases contested resulted in a case dismissed. The most common successful defences involved issues with receiving the initial penalty notice or administrative/identification errors. However, two convictions were recorded. In one, involving a vehicle recorded travelling at over 130kmph on the M7, the defendant said another person had been driving and that they had been too late in paying the fine, but the judge had a query over the nomination and the defendant was convicted, receiving a €450 fine.

In the second case, a vehicle was recorded travelling at over 140kmph on the M7. The defendant said he had previously sold the car and did not know where the logbook was or who he had sold it to. He was convicted and fined €500.

LETTERKENNY COMPARISON

The monitoring exercise recorded 11 convictions out of 18 speeding cases before Letterkenny court during the same period. Of the 18 cases with a recorded outcome, 11 resulted in convictions. The majority of offences were detected by fixed cameras and involved motorists travelling between 108km/h and 117km/h in 100km/h zones. Fines typically ranged from €320 to €380, with an average penalty of approximately €345.

Where cases were dismissed or struck out, the reasons generally related to summons issues, claims that notices had not been received, disputes over who was driving the vehicle, or instances where the State did not proceed with evidence.

A spokesperson for the Courts Service said: "Judges decide cases on the facts argued before them by the parties involved in the cases and a decision to convict or otherwise is solely one for judges after hearing the facts of cases.

"We do not comment on factors that contribute to differences in outcomes of speeding prosecutions between districts. There are too many factors that can play a role in the outcome of court cases so it would be purely speculative on our behalf to assign reasons for different outcomes."

The Courts Service spokesperson also said that An Garda Síochána was responsible for the cases brought before court and was therefore best placed to address trends in case volume. "They are the prosecutors and we take the prosecutions they provide without questioning the reasons why," the spokesperson said, adding that the courts have no role in applying penalty points.

The findings come against a backdrop of ongoing concern about excessive speed on Irish roads. Research by the Road Safety Authority (RSA) has found that one in four drivers killed in fatal crashes were exceeding a safe speed immediately before the collision.

An RSA spokesperson said enforcement, detection and the swift administration of sanctions remain critical to deterring dangerous driving behaviour. “While the RSA is not in a position to comment in detail on The Journal’s findings in relation to speeding prosecutions, we can assert that enforcement (supported by public awareness activity to support the enforcement), detection and the swift administration of appropriate sanctions are key to deterring engagement in dangerous behaviours such as speeding.”

This project was supported by the Courts Reporting Scheme (funded by Coimisiún na Meán), in partnership with the Journal Investigates team.