Plumb v Tritton [1915] HCA 47

Plumb v Tritton [1915] HCA 47

The offence under section 91 of the Health Act (Consolidated) can be proved by ordinary evidence and is not dependent upon compliance with the procedures in sections 103, 104 and 111p. Analysis and the division of samples into three parts, as required under those sections, are not essential conditions precedent to conviction unless the prosecution chooses to acquire evidence by those means.

Parties
Appellant; Complainant: Mark Plumb; Respondent; Defendant: Joseph W. Tritton
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 August 1915
Procedural Posture
Appeal / On Appeal From the Supreme Court of Queensland
Outcome
appeal allowed; conviction restored
Legal Topics
Adulterated Food, Statutory Proof Requirements, Remedies and Penalties Under Health Acts
Health Law Criminal Law Adulterated Food Statutory Proof Requirements Remedies and Penalties Under Health Acts

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mark Plumb

Appellant; Complainant

Joseph W. Tritton

Respondent; Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / On Appeal From the Supreme Court of Queensland

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether compliance with sections 103, 104, and 111p of the Health Acts 1900-1911 (Qd.) is necessary for proof of an offence under section 91 for selling adulterated food
  2. 2 Whether analysis and division of a sample into three parts is required in all prosecutions under section 91 of the Health Acts

Ratio Decidendi

The offence under section 91 of the Health Act (Consolidated) can be proved by ordinary evidence and is not dependent upon compliance with the procedures in sections 103, 104 and 111p. Analysis and the division of samples into three parts, as required under those sections, are not essential conditions precedent to conviction unless the prosecution chooses to acquire evidence by those means.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; conviction restored

Orders

  • Appeal allowed, without costs.
  • Rule nisi to quash conviction discharged, with costs.