Minister for Social Welfare v Land

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Court: High Court
• Judge: O'Daly C.J.:-
• Judgment Date: 01 January 1966
• Neutral Citation: 1930 WJSC-HC 818
• Date: 01 January 1966

1930 WJSC-HC 818

Minister for Social Welfare v. Land

The Minister for Social Welfare

v.

James J. Land.

O'Daly C.J.:-

1 This is an appeal from the President of the High Court on a case stated by District Justice O'Grady pursuant to s. 2 of the Summary jurisdiction Act, 1857.

"After the hearing and determination by a Justice or Justices of the Peace of any information or complaint which he or they have power to determine in a summary way, by any law now in force of hereafter to be made, either party to the proceeding with the said Justices or Justices determination as being erroneous in point of law, apply in writingWithin three days after the same to the said Justice or Justices, to state and sign a case setting forth the facts and the ground of such determination, for the opinion thereon of one of the superior courts of law to be named by the party applying; and such party, hereinafter called “the appellant”, shall within three days after receiving such case, transmit the same to the court named in his application, first giving notice in writing of such appeal, with a copy of the case so stated and signed, to the other party of the proceedings in which the determination was given hereinafter called the respondent."

Section 2 provides as follows:-

2 The case arose out of a prosecution by the Minister for Social Welfare in respect of alleged false statements and false representations made by the defendant with the object of obtaining unemployment benefit under the Social Welfare Acts.

3 The defendant was visited by an officer of the Department of Social Welfare and requested to make a statement. This he did, admitting that he was employed by a city firm as a carter on the several dates in respect of which the summonses were laid and what he claimed unemployment benefit in respect of those days. The statement went on to say that he intended to refund**???query???

4 When the case same before the District Justice the defendant was present, but he was not professionally represented.

5 The solicitor for the prosecution relied entirely on the statement by the defendant admitting the offence, and informed the court that no affirmative evidence of the facts would be offered. The officer who took the statement went into the witness box and gave evidence of obtaining the statement. He said that he told the defendant that he was not obliged to say anything but that anything he would say would be taken down and might be used in evidence; the defendant agreed to sign a statement.

6 The District Justice disallowed the statement as a voluntary confession, as he was not satisfied that it disclosed guilty knowledge of the offences set out in the several summonses.

7 In the High Court there was no appearance for the defendant. The learned President upheld the ruling of the District Justice. The complainant appealed.

8 On the appeal to this Court a preliminary object on has been taken on sehalf of the defendant it is objected that the case stated was not transmitted to the High Court by the appellant within the statutory period of three days required by section 2 of the Act of 1957.

9 The case stated was signed on the 8th May, 1961. It was received by the appellant on 12th May, 1961, but it was not transmitted to the High Court until the 26th May, that is to say, until after the expiry of the three days allowed for doing so. It was, however, transmitted within fourteen days of its receipt. Rule 201 of the District Court Rules, 1948 purports to authorise transmission within this extended period.

10 Mr. Bell for the respondent has contended that the appellant's failure to transmit the case within the period limited by the statute is total, and the purported extension of this period by rule 201 of the District Court Rules inultra vires the power of the rule-making authority.

11 The power of the District Court rule-making authority are set out in Section 91 of the Courts of Justice Act,1924....