R (Morell) v Justices of County Antrim (2)

CourtKing's Bench Division (Ireland)
Judgment Date01 January 1900
Date01 January 1900

Reg. (Morell)

Justices of Co. Antrim.

492 THE IRISH REPORTS. [1900. Q. Ji. Div. Treating that judgment of Lord Selborne as not limited in the __18i'9-__way that is relied upon here, lie goes on to consider the doctrine. CuowLEr -pjg ^approves of the rule laid down in Britain v. Rossiter (lj, O'Sci.mvan- and he holds that the doctrine of part performance is applicable to Palles C.B. any case m which a Court of Equity would, before the statute, have decreed specific performance. [The Chief Baron then discussed the question as to the amount of damages, and ultimately expressed his opinion that the motion to set aside the verdict should be refused with costs.] Andrews and Johnson, JJ., concurred. Solicitor for the plaintiff : P. T. Carroll. Solicitor for the defendant: Maurice Healy. j. l. Q. B. Div. BEG. (MOEELL) v. JUSTICES OF CO. ANTRIM (2). 1900. Dec. 16. Licensing lawLicence for sale of intoxicating liquors on or off the premises RenewalCertificate of Justices as to " the peaceable and orderly manner in which such house has been conducted in the past year " (17 ey 18 Vict, c. 89, s. 11)Licence lying dormant for consumption "on," but used for consumption " off," the premisesUndertaking given by licensee not to use the licence, or to use same in limited manner onlyObligation to supply reasonable refreshment to all comers. D. & Co., large distillers and wholesale and general family wine and spirit merchants, held for many years an ordinary retail licence for consumption of spirits " on or off the premises " in respect of their place of business in Belfast. Upon their application in 1899 to the Justices of Petty Sessions for a renewal of this licence, objection was made by the officer of police that the premises had not been " conducted " as licensed premises in the past year. Save that some six half-glasses of whiskey had been sold and consumed thereon, there was no evidence of any trade as publicans being carried on by the applicants of (1) 11 Q. B. D. 123. (2) Before Palms, C.B., and Johnson, Gibson, and Madden, JJ. Vol. II.] QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION. 493 supplying the public with intoxicating liquor for consumption on the premises; Q. Ii. Dir. but there was evidence that a large trade was done in sending out and 1500. delivering from time to time to customers spirits in quantities between two Tue Qceen gallons and two quartsa trade not covered either by applicants' wholesale v- & ^ JnSTICES op licence (43 & 44 Yict. c. 24, ss. 102, 104), or their licence as spirit grocers Anteim. (8 & 9 Vict. c. 64, s. 1) : Held, on application for a certiorari to quash the grant of a certificate by the Justices, that, the premises not having been conducted as licensed premises for the consumption of intoxicating liquors on the premises during the preceding year, it was not competent to the Sessions to grant a certificate as to the peaceable and orderly manner in which same had been conducted, as licensed premises, in that period. Keg. (Cox) v. Recorder of Dublin (16 L. B,. Ir. 424), and Reg. (Lambe) v. Justices of Co. Armagh ([1897] 2 Ir. It. 57) applied. Queere, as to the liability of a licensed publican to supply reasonable refreshments to all comers ? Certiorari. Motion to make absolute, notwithstanding cause shown, a conditional order for a writ of certiorari directed to Justices of the county Antrim to remove and quash an adjudication by them at the Annual Licensing Petty Sessions for Belfast City, on the 30th September, 1899, granting the application of B. Gr. Dunville and four others, trading as Dunville & Co., Limited, for the certificate required for the purpose of obtaining " a licence for the sale of spirits to be consumed on the premises in the house and premises 8 and 10, Calendar-street, and 25 to 35, Arthur-street, Belfast," on the ground of want and excess of jurisdiction, and that " the premises not having been used as licensed premises in the year last immediately preceding it was not within the competence of the Justices to grant a certificate to the good character of the applicants, or that the said house was conducted in a peaceable and orderly manner within the meaning of the statutory provisions in that behalf." The conditional order was obtained on the affidavit of II. B. Morell, District Inspector of Police, which stated that at the Belfast Annual Licensing Petty Sessions on the 30th September, 1899, B. G. Dunville and four others, trading as Dunville & Co., Limited, of 8 and 10, Calendar-street, and 25 to 35, Arthur-street, in the City of Belfast, applied for the certificate (required by 1900Vol. II. 2 M 494 THE HUSH REPORTS. [1900. Q. li. Div. 17 & 18 Viet. c. 89, s. 11), for the purpose of obtaining a renewal 1900'_of the licence as publicans which they had held for some years in Tub Queen reSpect 0| the house and premises [" 8 and 10, Calendar-street, and Justices oe 25 to 35, Arthur-street."] The District Inspector had served nthiji. noj.jc0 Qf pjs intentiou to oppose the application ou the grouud that the business contemplated by the licence for the consumption of beer and spirits on the premises had not during the past year been carried on in the premises. He stated that, on the hearing of the application, evidence was given for the objector that the applicants, Duuville & Co., who were long established distillers and wholesale wine and spirit merchants, carrying ou business on the premises mentioned, had not used and did not use the premises as a public-house for the sale by retail of intoxicating liquors for consumption ou the premises, or at all as a public-house ; that it was not disputed that the business there carried on was of a wholesale character, and that it was not disputed that they did not to any appreciable extent (1) sell intoxicating liquor by retail for consumption on the premises, or use the premises for the purpose of such retail trade, and...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • The King (at the prosecution of Peter Thos. Roe) v The County Court Judge and Chairman of Quarter Sessions and Other Justices of The Peace for The County of Roscommon
    • Ireland
    • Court of Appeal (Ireland)
    • 4 December 1903
    ...L.C.J., and Johnson and Kenny JJ. (1) 31 I. L. T. R. 47. (2) [1897] 2 I. R. 57. (1) 31 I. L. T. R. 47. (2) [1897] 2 I. R. 57. (3) [1900] 2 I. R. 492. (1) 31 I. L. T. R. 47. (2) [1900] 2 I. R. 492. (1) 22 L. R. Ir. 487. (2) [1900] 2 I. R. 492. (1) [1900] 2 I. R. 492, 499. (2) [1897] 2 I. R. ......
  • The King (Bourke) v The Justices of Dublin The King (Moriarty) v The Same
    • Ireland
    • Court of Appeal (Ireland)
    • 18 February 1903
    ...of DublinUNK 16 L. R. Ir. 424. R. (Jones) v. The Justices of KerryDLTR [1897] 31 I. L. T. R. 47. R. (Morell) v. Justices of AntrimIR [1900] 2 I. R. 492. R. v. Lancashire JusticesUNK 55 J. P. 580. R. v. WilkinsonUNK 10 L. T. (N. S.) 370. Reg. v. BowmanELR [1898] 1 Q. B. 663. The Queen (Lambe......
  • Re Gorman
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 12 February 1971
    ...should, in my opinion, be answered "No." Walsh J. :— I agree. Budd J. :— I agree also. 1 (1885) 16 L.R. Ir. 424. 2 [1897] 2 I.R. 57. 3 [1900] 2 I.R. 492. 4 [1905] 2 I.R. 101. 5 [1964] Ir. Jur. Rep. 41. 6 [1907] A.C. 420. 7 (1947) 82 I.L.T.R. 19. 8 (1897) 31 I.L.T.R. 47. 9 (1885) 16 L.R. Ir.......
  • State (Attorney General) v Judge Durcan
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 23 April 1964
    ...order it did, it should exercise its discretion to do so. The cause shown will be allowed and the conditional order discharged(1). (1) [1900] 2 I. R. 492. (2) [1905] 2 I. R. (3) [1906] 2 I. R. 446. (4) [1923] 2 I. R. 79. (5) [1924] 2 I. R. 55. (6) 4 Burr. 2456. (7) 65 I. L. T. R. 157. (8) 6......
  • 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