Minister for Industry and Commerce v Steele

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 01 January 1954
• Date: 01 January 1954
• Docket Number: (1).
• Court: Supreme Court

Minister for Industry and Commerce v. Steele

THE MINISTER FOR INDUSTRY AND COMMERCE

Complainant

and

CHRISTIAN FREDERICK STEELE

Defendant (1).

Supreme Court.

Evidence - Burden of proof - Matter peculiarly within defendant's knowledge - Contravention of Emergency Powers Orders - Control of prices - Pork sausages - Maximum price - Sale of sausages at price in excess of authorised price for pork sausages - "Sausages of which not less than 65 per cent. of the meat content consists of pork" - Meat content - Pork content - Onus of proof cast upon defendant - Emergency Powers (Pork Sausages and Sausage Meat) (Maximum Prices) Order, 1943 (Stat. R. & Or., 1943, No. 192).

In the Emergency Powers (Pork Sausages and Sausage Meat) (Maximum Prices) Order, 1943, "pork sausages" are defined as "sausages of which not less than 65 per cent. of the meat content consists of pork." By the said Order it is provided inter alia that no person shall sell pork sausages or pork sausage meat having a meat content of less than 35 per cent.; that no person shall sell pork sausages at a price exceeding the appropriate price as set out in the First Schedule to the order; that such commodities when offered or exposed for sale shall bear a ticket or label clearly indicating the description of sausages or sausage meat offered or exposed for sale.

C., an inspector of the Department of Industry and Commerce, purchased at the defendant's shop in Dublin 1 lb. of sausages for which he paid the shop assistant the sum of 2s. 6d., and he was given a receipt in which the sausages sold to him were described as "pork sausages." Subsequently, C. found that the weight of the sausages exceeded 1 lb. and that he had in fact been charged and had paid at the rate of 2s. 2d. per lb. for the sausages. On analysis it was found that the meat content of the sausages was 78 per cent.; the maximum retail price of such sausages, under the provisions of the said Order, was 2s. 0d. per lb. S. was prosecuted for 1, selling pork sausages at a price in excess of the maximum legal price, and 2, for exposing such sausages for sale without displaying a ticket or label indicating the description of the sausages, in contravention of the said Order. Evidence was given at the hearing which showed that it was not possible to prove by analysis or other scientific method what percentage of the meat content of the sausages was pork. The District Justice convicted the defendant on both charges and imposed a fine of £20 in respect of the overcharging and a fine of £5 in respect of the failure to exhibit the appropriate label. On the defendant appealing to the Circuit Court, it was argued, on his behalf, that there was no evidence that the sausages sold to C. were pork sausages, within the meaning of Art. 2 of the said Order, and that there was no evidence that the defendant had offered for sale "pork sausages," within the meaning of the said Order. It was further argued that the onus of proof lay on the prosecution and that that onus had not been discharged. On behalf of the complainant it was contended that the defendant by his receipt had admitted that the sausages were in fact pork sausages; that there was no evidence that there was any kind of meat in the sausages other than pork; that if there were any meat other than pork in the sausages that was a matter peculiarly within the knowledge of the defendant and that the onus of proof had accordingly been shifted from the prosecution to the defendant.

The President of the Circuit Court, being of opinion that the prosecution had failed to discharge the onus of proof and that the appeals should be allowed and the summonses dismissed, at the request of counsel for the complainant, agreed to state a Case for the opinion of the Supreme Court upon the question whether he was right in his opinion that the summonses should be dismissed.

Held by the Supreme Court that in the circumstances the onus of proof had shifted so as to cast upon the defendant the onus of proving that the meat content of the sausages did not contain 65 per cent. of pork. As the defendant had not offered any evidence on this matter the trial Judge was entitled to find, and ought to have held, that not less than 65 per cent. of the meat

content of the sausages consisted of pork, and that the sausages exposed for sale and sold were "pork sausages" within the meaning of the said Order.

The Court accordingly answered the question in the Case Stated in the negative.

Case Stated by the President of the Circuit Court (Shannon J.) for the opinion of the Supreme Court on a question of law, pursuant to s. 16 of the Courts of Justice Act, 1947.

The facts appear fully from the Case Stated, which was as follows:—

"1. On the 17th August, 1948, the defendant, Christian Frederick Steele, appeared in the District Court in Dublin before District Justice T. G. O'Sullivan in answer to a summons, in which the Minister for Industry and Commerce was the complainant and the said Christian Frederick Steele was defendant, whereby the said defendant was charged that he did on the 14th May, 1948, at 98 Talbot Street, in the City of Dublin, unlawfully sell by retail at a price of 2s. 6d. to one, Seamus O'Caisin, at not less than 12 sausages to the pound weight 1 lb. 1 oz. 10 drs. and 3 grs. of pork sausages having a meat content of 78 per cent. consisting of 18 sausages which said price exceeded a price calculated at the rate of 2s. 2d. per lb. in contravention of Art. 6 of the Emergency Powers (Pork Sausages and Sausage Meat) (Maximum Prices) Order, 1943 (Stat. R. and Or., 1943, No. 192), as amended by Art. 2 of the Emergency Powers (Pork Sausages and Sausage Meat) (Maximum Prices) Order, 1943 (Amendment) (No. 2) Order, 1947 (Stat. R. and Or., 1947, No. 259), contrary to s. 6 of the Supplies and Services (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1946, as amended and extended." [A copy of the said summons was annexed to, and formed part of, the Case Stated.]

"2. On the same date the defendant was charged before the said District Justice on a second summons that he unlawfully offered for sale pork sausages of a description mentioned in the first Schedule of the said Emergency Powers (Pork Sausages and Sausage Meat) (Maximum Prices) Order, 1943, as amended by Art. 2 of the Emergency Powers (Pork Sausages and Sausage Meat) (Maximum Prices) Order, 1943 (Amendment) (No. 2) Order, 1947, without having clearly indicated by means of a ticket or label the description of the sausages so offered for sale in contravention of Art. 8 of the said Emergency Powers (Pork Sausages and Sausage Meat) (Maximum Prices) Order, 1943, as amended by Art. 2 of the Emergency Powers (Pork Sausages and Sausage Meat) (Maximum Prices) Order 1943 (Amendment) (No. 2) Order, 1947, contrary to s. 6 of the Supplies and Services (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1946, as amended and extended." [A copy of this summons also was annexed to, and formed part of, the Case Stated.]

"3...