A High Court Judge has ruled in favour of a man from Corkman who took a judicial review case concerning a Garda’s refusal to grant him gun licences.

Mr Justice Garrett Simons delivered his conclusion on February 8, finding in favour of Frank Brennan versus the Chief Superintendent of the Cork West Division.

The judicial review sought to challenge two related decisions made under the Firearms Act 1925 and the Firearms Act 1964, respectively.

The case related to two firearms described as “short firearms.”

There is now a general prohibition on the grant of firearm certificates in respect of short firearms, noted the Judge.

“This is subject to a number of exceptions including, relevantly, where the application for a firearm certificate is made in respect of a short firearm for which the applicant had held a firearm certificate on or before 19 November 2008.”

The law includes a “grandfathering” provision, whereby a person who had previously held a firearm certificate in respect of a particular short firearm is allowed to apply for further certificates in respect of that specific weapon.

The firearm in this case “is a restricted firearm and thus it would follow that a substitution application may only be determined by the Commissioner or an officer.”

Mr Brennan had been granted a certificate in respect of the grandfathered firearm in February 2017.

This firearm certificate was valid for three years. It was amended in July 2019 by the substitution of a modern firearm for the grandfathered firearm.

The amended firearm cert duly expired in February 2020.

Mr Brennan applied for a firearm cert in respect of the grandfathered firearm on September 4, 2020.

This was for a new firearm certificate, rather than an application for the renewal of an extant firearm certificate.

On the same date, Mr Brennan applied to substitute a modern firearm for the grandfathered firearm.

“The applicant intended that the issuing person would make two decisions in sequence,” noted the Judge.

In the event, the Garda refused both applications. During correspondence, he wrote on October 23, 2020: “In May 2019 having considered Mr Brennan’s application I invited him to discuss his application with him personally at my office in Bandon Garda Station.

“I met Mr Brennan in the presence of Sgt Kay O’Donoghue. I explained to him on that date that I had no difficulty with the substitution but that I would not be giving him a license for the new firearm when the license was due to expire.”

This letter “appears to address only the second of the two applications submitted on 4 September 2020”, that is, “the application to substitute the modern firearm for the grandfathered firearm, and the citation of the legislative provisions is somewhat confused,” stated the Judge.

The Garda corresponded with Mr Brennan by letter in late 2020, outlining his reasons for refusal.

However, “the chain of correspondence does not convey the rationale now advanced in the verified statement of opposition and the legal submissions,” wrote Mr Justice Simons.

In his conclusion, Mr Justice Simons writes that the Garda, “failed to comply with his obligation, under… the Firearms Act 1925, to inform the applicant in writing of the reasons for the refusal of the two firearm certificate applications made in May 2020.

“This failure undermined the effectiveness of the applicant’s statutory right of appeal to the District Court.”

The two related decisions made by the Garda “should be set aside”.

Judge Simons’ provisional view was that Mr Brennan, “having been entirely successful in the proceedings, is entitled to his costs.”

If the Garda wishes to contend for a different form of costs order, “he will have an opportunity to do so at a short hearing on February 22, 2023, at 10.45am,” concluded the Judge.