John B. Goddard and Company Ltd v Accountant General

JurisdictionSt Lucia
JudgeLewis, C.J.
Judgment Date21 January 1971
Neutral CitationLC 1971 CA 1
Docket NumberCriminal Appeal No. 5/1970
CourtCourt of Appeal (Saint Lucia)
Date21 January 1971

Court of Appeal

Lewis, C.J., Gordon, J.A., Lewis, J.A.

Criminal Appeal No. 5/1970

John B. Goddard and Co. Ltd.
and
Accountant General
Appearances:

K. Foster for the appellant.

L. A. Williams, Attorney General, for the respondent.

Criminal law - Appeal against conviction — Illegal disposal

Statute - Interpretation — Section 20(2) — Interpretation Act 1968

Facts: The appellant company was convicted for the offence of illegally disposing of 5 cartons of rum contrary to section 28(1) of the Liquor Licence Act 1969. The appellant appealed on the ground that the plea of autre fois conviction was wrongly rejected by the magistrate. Evidence was introduced which indicated that another case had been brought against the same appellant and that the case was withdrawn against the appellant and proceeded with against the managing director of the company in question

Facts: The issue was whether proceedings brought against the appellant company by virtue of section 28(1) of the Liquor Licence Act 1969 were irregular as it did not appear on the face of the complaint or in evidence that they had been brought under the direction of the Attorney General in accordance with sec. 20(3) of the Interpretation Act 1968.

Held: The ground of appeal failed since the first essential of such a plea is that the party on whose behalf that plea is put forward must be the same party in respect of whom the previous acquittal was entered.

Held: Subsection (2) gives the power to charge an officer of the company whereas the company itself can be charged under the statute creating the offence without recourse to subsection (2) so that subsection (3) referred to the case of prosecution against an officer of the company when speaking of charging a person under subsection (2). In the instant case the prosecution if against the company and subsection (3) does not apply.

Lewis, C.J.
1

The appellant company was convicted on the 15th September last year by the magistrate of the First District Court for the offence of disposing illegally of five cartons of Mount Gay rum contrary to section 28 (l) of the Liquor Licence Act (No. 18 of 1869). He has appealed against his conviction on two ground, namely that the plea of autrefois acquit, which he put forward before the magistrate, was wrongly rejected; secondly, that the proceedings were irregular as it did not appear on the face of the complaint or in evidence that they had been brought under the direction of the Attorney General in accordance with section 20 (3) of the Interpretation Act (No. 18 of 1968).

2

It is not necessary to go into the facts of the case since both grounds are based purely upon statute. It is sufficient to say that a certain amount of evidence was introduced into the case which indicated, somewhat vaguely, that another case had been brought against the same appellant previously, that at the trial of that case it was withdrawn — that is the technical effect of what was done — it was withdrawn against the appellant and proceeded with against John B. Goddard who is the Managing Director of the company. This was done by way of amending the name of the defendant in that case. It appears that some evidence was led at the trial and then the Attorney General, who was prosecuting, decided not to proceed further with the case against the Managing Director, so a verdict of not guilty was entered and the case was dismissed.

3

No official record of the dismissal was put in, but for the purposes of this appeal the court is prepared to accept...

To continue reading

Request your trial

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