Kench v Bailey [1926] HCA 5

Kench v Bailey [1926] HCA 5

Section 101 of the Justices Act 1902 (N.S.W.) confers a right of appeal by way of special case on any party to proceedings, including prosecutors, when justices exercise summary jurisdiction, and nothing in s.107(2) of the Public Health Act 1902 (N.S.W.) or s.40 of the Pure Food Act 1908 (N.S.W.) removes or limits this right. The special provision in the Pure Food Act stands, and the appeal to the Supreme Court was competent.

Parties
Appellant: Arthur Kench; Respondent: Francis Walter Bailey
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 April 1926
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal From Supreme Court of New South Wales to the High Court of Australia
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Right of Appeal, Summary Jurisdiction, Statutory Interpretation, Public Health Offences
Administrative Law Criminal Law Right of Appeal Summary Jurisdiction Statutory Interpretation Public Health Offences

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Arthur Kench

Appellant

Francis Walter Bailey

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal From Supreme Court of New South Wales to the High Court of Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a prosecutor has the right of appeal under s.101 of the Justices Act 1902 (N.S.W.) when an information for an offence under the Pure Food Act 1908 (N.S.W.) is dismissed
  2. 2 Whether s.107(2) of the Public Health Act 1902 (N.S.W.) restricts the right of appeal to 'persons aggrieved,' excluding prosecutors

Ratio Decidendi

Section 101 of the Justices Act 1902 (N.S.W.) confers a right of appeal by way of special case on any party to proceedings, including prosecutors, when justices exercise summary jurisdiction, and nothing in s.107(2) of the Public Health Act 1902 (N.S.W.) or s.40 of the Pure Food Act 1908 (N.S.W.) removes or limits this right. The special provision in the Pure Food Act stands, and the appeal to the Supreme Court was competent.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order appealed from discharged with costs
  • Case remitted to Supreme Court to determine the appeal from the Stipendiary Magistrate according to the High Court's judgment