Minister for Posts and Telegraphs v Campbell

Judgment Date13 May 1966
Date13 May 1966
CourtHigh Court
Minister for Posts and Telegraphs v. Campbell.

District Court - Prosecution - Unlicensed television set - "Did unlawfully keep or have in his possession" - Evidence - Onus of proof - Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1926 (No. 45 of 1926), s. 3.

Case Stated by District Justice M. J. C. Keane, a Justice assigned to District No. 16, pursuant to the provisions of s. 52 of the Courts (Supplemental Provisions) Act, 1961.

The Case Stated was as follows:—

"1. This is a consultative case stated by me, a Justice of the District Court assigned to District No. 16, pursuant to the provisions of s. 52 of the Courts (Supplemental Provisions) Act, 1961.

2. The charge in this case came before me by summons for hearing at Clane, Co. Kildare, on the 6th day of October, 1964, and was thereafter adjourned from time to time at the request of the prosecution until the 24th day of November, 1965, when the taking of the evidence for the prosecution was completed at a sitting of the District Court at Naas, Co. Kildare, In the summons the defendant is charged by the complainant that on the 9th day of March, 1964, he, the defendant 'did unlawfully keep or have in his possession certain apparatus for wireless telegraphy, to wit, a television set such keeping or possession not having been authorised by a licence for the time being in force,' contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided. A certified copy of the said summons and a copy declaration of service of the summons, endorsed on the back of the summons, is sent herewith. The charge is laid under s. 3 of the Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1926. At the hearing the complainant was represented by Mr. Benjamin Dixon, Barrister-at-Law, instructed by Mr. T. R. Brennan, State Solicitor for County Kildare. The defendant did not appear and was not professionally represented.

(3) The following matters were proved in evidence:—

(a) Thomas Brown, an inspector for the Department of Posts and Telegraphs, called to a cottage on the outskirts of the village of Clane, County Kildare, on the 9th March, 1964. He described the location of this cottage, and identified the cottage as the building standing on the plot of ground edged red on the Valuation Office map. In the cottage the inspector spoke to a woman, and then inspected the cottage, in which he found a television set standing on a table. There was no evidence that it was attached to the realty.

(b) A certificate of valuation was put in evidence in respect of this cottage, which is shown on the Valuation Office map on the plot edged red. The certificate states on its face that the occupier of this cottage is one, Christopher Campbell. I am satisfied on the oral evidence that the defendant is the Christopher Campbell named in the certificate of valuation.

(c) Thomas Brown, the inspector for the Department of Posts and Telegraphs, also proved in evidence...

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 cases
  • DPP v Byrne
    • Ireland
    • Court of Criminal Appeal
    • Invalid date
  • DPP v Michael Byrne
    • Ireland
    • Court of Criminal Appeal
    • 7 June 2000
    ...ACT 1990 S3 DPP V MYERS 1964 2 AER 881 CRIMINAL EVIDENCE ACT 1992 S6 CRIMINAL EVIDENCE ACT 1992 S5 CAMPBELL V MIN FOR POSTS & TELEGRAPHS 1966 IR 69 AG, PEOPLE V NUGENT & BYRNE 1964 ILTR 139 LARCENY ACT 1916 S33 Synopsis: Criminal Law Evidence; hearsay; handling; applicant had been convicted......
  • DPP v Ebbs
    • Ireland
    • Court of Criminal Appeal
    • 3 March 2011
    ...- Judges' Rules - Discretion - Whether trial judge entitled to admit statement in evidence - Minister for Posts and Telegraphs v Campbell [1966] IR 69 and People (Director of Public Prosecutions) v Byrne [1988] 2 IR 417 followed; CC v Ireland [2005] IESC 48, [2006] 4 IR 1 distinguished; R......
  • The People (at the suit of the DPP) v Aidan Conroy
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 26 July 2021
    ...item. The case most often cited as a standard authority is the judgment of Davitt P on a case stated in the High Court in Minister for Posts & Telegraphs v Campbell [1966] IR 69, 73 that: person cannot … be properly said to keep or have possession of an article unless he has control of it ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT