R (James White) v The Justices for The County of Cork
Jurisdiction | Ireland |
Judgment Date | 06 November 1916 |
Date | 06 November 1916 |
Court | King's Bench Division (Ireland) |
K. B. Div.
CASES
DETERMINED BY
THE KING'S BENCH DIVISION
OF
THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN IRELAND,
AND ON APPEAL THEREFROM IN
THE COURT OF APPEAL,
AND BY
THE COURT FOR CROWN CASES RESERVED.
1917.
Justices — Jurisdiction — Petty Sessions — Certiorari — Uncertainty of Conviction — Offences charged disjunctively, and Conviction General — Fisheries (Ireland) Act, 1869 (32 & 33 vict. c.92), s.16 — “Erecting” or “making use of” a Fixed Engine.
A general conviction on a complaint which charges the defendant with “erecting” or “making use of” a fixed engine for the capture of salmon contrary to sect. 16 of the Fisheries (Ireland) Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 92), is bad for uncertainty, since “erecting” denotes an offence distinct from “making use of” under that Act and section, and, consequently, two separate offences are disjunctively charged, the conviction not stating of which offence the accused was convicted.
R. (Coyle) v. Tyrone Justices, 42 I. L. T. R. 26, distinguished.
Motion to make absolute a conditional order for a writ of certiorari to bring up and quash an order of conviction made against the prosecutor, James White, and one, Patrick Regan, by the justices of the peace for the county of Cork, sitting at petty sessions for the district of Passage West, on the 18th April, 1916.
The prosecutor, James White, and Patrick Regan, were charged by George Futter, secretary of the Cork Board of Fishery Conservators, No. 5 District, in a summons as follows:— “That on the 15th day of March, 1916, at Monkstown, you, the said defendants, did unlawfully in that portion of the River Lee, off Monkstown, make use of or erect a fixed engine for the capture of salmon without having obtained a certificate from the special commissioners for Irish fisheries under the provisions of the Salmon Fisheries (Ireland) Act, 1863, or a certificate from the inspectors acting in execution of this Act in regard to such fixed engine, viz. a net (32 & 33 Vict. c. 92, s. 16).”
The case was heard at Passage West petty sessions on the 18th April, 1916. It appeared from the affidavit of Captain O'Driscoll, chairman of the Bench, which was filed to show cause,
that the following evidence was given by the prosecution:—On the night of the 14th March, 1916, the police at Monkstown observed a boat containing two men stationary in the River Lee. The boat remained in the same position for some time, and the men in her were observed to be putting something into the water. Early on the morning of the 15th March, 1916, the two defendants to the complaint were observed to leave the shore in the boat which had been under observation the previous night. The boat had been searched by the police and found to be empty. When the two defendants...To continue reading
Request your trial-
Wedick v Osmond & Son Ltd
...[1902] 2 K. B. 1. (3) [1904] 2 I. R. 27. (4) [1891] 2 Q. B. 588. (5) 5 A. C. 857. (1) 27 I. L. T. R. 127. (2) [1914] 2 I. R. 150. (3) [1917] 2 I. R. 310. (4) [1901] 2 I. R. 589. (5) [1901] 2 I. R. 39. (6) [1902] 2 I. R. 569. (7) [1928] I. R. 460. (8) [1934] I. R. 282. (1) 5 A. C. 857. (2) [......