Fitzpatr1ck v McCormack

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Mr. Justice Keane
• Judgment Date: 30 May 1984
• Neutral Citation: 1985 WJSC-HC 209
• Docket Number: No. 8505P/1982
• Court: High Court
• Date: 30 May 1984

FITZPATR1CK v. MCCORMACK

Between:-

Thomas Fitzpatrick and Stella Fitzpatrick

Plaintiffs

and

James McCormack

Defendant

Also:-

The State at the Prosecution of the Director of PublicProsecutions and Others

.v.

District Justice Benedict J. Daly

1985 WJSC-HC 209

No. 8505P/1982

No. 486 S.S./1982

The High Court

Synopsis:

LICENSING ACTS

Licence

Forfeiture - Holder of licence - Breaches of licensing code - Multiple convictions - Third conviction attracting forfeiture if person convicted was the holder of licence - Ad interim transfer of licence - Interim transfer effected before third conviction - Whether transferor was the holder of licence at date of third conviction - Held in affirmative - Licence properly endorsed for third time and licence forfeited - Intoxicating Liquor Act, 1927, s. 15 - (1982 No. 8505P - Keane J. - 30/5/84).

Fitzpatrick v. McCormack

WORDS & PHRASES

"Holder"

Licensing Acts - Licence - Forfeiture - Breaches of licensing code - Multiple convictions - Third conviction attracting forfeiture if person convicted was the holder of licence - Ad interim transfer of licence - Interim transfer effected before third conviction - Whether transferor was the holder of licence at date of third conviction - Held in affirmative - Licence properly endorsed for third time and licence forfeited - Intoxicating Liquor Act, 1927, s. 15 - (1982 No. 8505P - Keane J. - 30/5/84).

Fitzpatrick v. McCormack

Citations:

DUMIGAN V WALSH 1904 2 IR 298

INTOXICATING LIQUOR ACT 1927 S28

1 Judgment delivered by Mr. Justice Keaneon 30th May 1984Mary P. O'Donoghue Registrar

2 Mr. Justice Keane stated that the facts were not seriously in dispute and had been outlined in the Plenary Proceedings. He went on to outline the said facts very briefly.

3 He then went on to say that the determination of the case depended on the answers to the following two questions:-

4 (1) Whether Thomas was the "holder" of the licence under Section 28 of the Intoxicating Liquor Act 1927at the time of conviction. If the answer to this question is yes then the licence is forfeited. However if the answer is no then the second question came into play.

5 (2) Was the ad-interim transfer bona fids or was it an attempt to pervert the course of justice?

6 It is quite clear from the authorities already quoted that an ad-interim transfer by the District Court is no more than an authority to carry on until the next licensing session. However, this does not necessarily mean that the transferee does not become "the holder". It is clear that he is responsible for his own conduct...