Harold Wood Lose Records Appeal
Page 35
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
DECAUSE the statutory requirements
had not been complied with, an appeal by Harold Wood and Sons, Ltd., haulage contractors, of Heckmondwike, Yorkshire, against two convictions for failing to cause records to be kept, was dismissed with costs by the West Riding Quarter Sessions Appeal Committee, at Wakefield on Monday, without the case being heard.
The company had been fined £10 on each of two summonses at Dewsbury. West Riding, court, last June.
Mr. A. M. Hurwitz, for the respondents, pointed out that two notices of appeal had been served. The first one did not say what the convictions were and it did not say there were two convictions. The notice might mean anything. Subsequently a second notice was sent in, but this was "out of time."
Mr. G. S. P. Mason, for the appellants, submitted there had been no prejudice of the respondents by what had been done. He admitted that the first notice was not "a good one and that the second one was "out of time." He then applied for the chairman's permission for leave to appeal out of time and to submit a fresh notice.
Mr. Geoffrey Veale. Q.C.. chairman,
said it was a very curious position. There were two notices of appeal, the first Of which was admitted by counsel for the appellants to be a bad one. There could be no argument that the second notice was very much "out of time."
It was not a question of the respondent taking up a point, for appeals to Quarter Sessions were "features of statute." Quarter Sessions were bound by Act of Parliament and had no jurisdiction to deal with a matter unless a proper notice were given and the other formalities complied with.
Therefore, sitting as an appeal committee, they had no jurisdiction to deal with the appeal.
In these circumstances counsel for the appellants had applied to him, Mr. Veale. as chairman of the courts, for leave. to appeal out of time, "That ü a matter that is entirely within my discretion." Mr. Veale declared. "I do not propose, in the exercise of my discretion, to give leave to appeal out of time."
The appellants were a company. The offences were committed as long ago as January; the hearing and convictions were in June: the first notice of appeal was given in July and the second (which was 'out of time "1 was in October. .