Davies v Ryan [1933] HCA 64

Davies v Ryan [1933] HCA 64

The High Court has jurisdiction to hear the appeal, as the order of dismissal constitutes an appealable 'order', 'ruling', or 'determination'. Further, the information, by following the words of the ordinance and disclosing one offence only, was sufficient in law and the magistrate should not have dismissed it for lack of particulars.

Parties
Informant: Alfred David Davies; Defendant/respondent: Mary Ryan
Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Court of Petty Sessions to High Court (decision on Preliminary Objection and Merits)
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Appeals, Summary Offences, Information Sufficiency, Magistrates' Jurisdiction

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 2 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alfred David Davies

Informant

Mary Ryan

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Court of Petty Sessions to High Court (decision on Preliminary Objection and Merits)

  1. 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to hear an appeal from an order of dismissal under sec. 143(1) of the Court of Petty Sessions Ordinance
  2. 2 Whether the information laid was sufficient in law to disclose an offence under the Liquor Ordinance 1929-1932

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court has jurisdiction to hear the appeal, as the order of dismissal constitutes an appealable 'order', 'ruling', or 'determination'. Further, the information, by following the words of the ordinance and disclosing one offence only, was sufficient in law and the magistrate should not have dismissed it for lack of particulars.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order of dismissal set aside
  • Matter remitted to the Court of Petty Sessions to hear and determine the information