Grieve v Lewis [1917] HCA 48

Grieve v Lewis [1917] HCA 48

The information properly disclosed an offence under reg. 40c(b) of the War Precautions Regulations 1915, as the provision includes industrial operations connected with or incidental to shipping, such as carriage of goods to wharves; the evidence established the attempt to dissuade; and the regulation was properly proved in evidence. Therefore, the appeal is allowed and a conviction should be entered.

Parties
Appellant: John Alexander Grieve; Respondent: Arthur Lewis
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 September 1917
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / On Appeal From Court of Petty Sessions of Victoria
Outcome
Appeal allowed; conviction and penalty imposed by consent.
Legal Topics
War Precautions Act, War Precautions Regulations, Industrial Operations Related to Shipping, Offences Against Regulations
Criminal Law Statutory Interpretation War Emergency Legislation War Precautions Act War Precautions Regulations Industrial Operations Related to Shipping Offences Against Regulations

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Alexander Grieve

Appellant

Arthur Lewis

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / On Appeal From Court of Petty Sessions of Victoria

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the information disclosed an offence under reg. 40c(b) of the War Precautions Regulations 1915
  2. 2 Whether the evidence established that the respondent attempted to dissuade a person from continuing in an industrial operation connected with shipping
  3. 3 Proper construction of the phrase 'any such industrial operation' in reg. 40c(b)

Ratio Decidendi

The information properly disclosed an offence under reg. 40c(b) of the War Precautions Regulations 1915, as the provision includes industrial operations connected with or incidental to shipping, such as carriage of goods to wharves; the evidence established the attempt to dissuade; and the regulation was properly proved in evidence. Therefore, the appeal is allowed and a conviction should be entered.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; conviction and penalty imposed by consent.

Orders

  • Defendant convicted and fined £10.
  • Defendant ordered to pay £10 for costs in both Courts.