Grundy & Co Excavations Ltd., R (on the application of) & Anor v Halton Division Magistrates Court

Grundy & Co Excavations Ltd., R (on the application of) & Anor v Halton Division Magistrates Court

Sections 9 and 17 of the Forestry Act 1967 impose a legal burden on the accused to prove on the balance of probabilities that no licence was required or that an exception applies. This burden is compatible with Article 6(2) of the European Convention on Human Rights because it is necessary and proportionate in the...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: Grundy & Co Excavations Ltd; Claimant: Sean Parry; Defendant: Halton Division Magistrates Court; Interested Party: The Forestry Commission
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 February 2003
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment on Application for Judicial Review
Outcome
Application for judicial review dismissed
Legal Topics
Burden of Proof, Mens Rea, Strict Liability, Licensing Offences, Judicial Review, Statutory Interpretation
Criminal Law Administrative Law Environmental Law Burden of Proof Mens Rea Strict Liability Licensing Offences Judicial Review +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Grundy & Co Excavations Ltd

Claimant

Sean Parry

Claimant

Halton Division Magistrates Court

Defendant

The Forestry Commission

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment on Application for Judicial Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the burden of proof under sections 9 and 17 of the Forestry Act 1967 lies on the prosecution or the accused
  2. 2 Whether the offence under section 17 of the Forestry Act 1967 requires proof of mens rea
  3. 3 Whether the imposition of a legal burden on the accused is compatible with Article 6(2) of the European Convention on Human Rights

Ratio Decidendi

Sections 9 and 17 of the Forestry Act 1967 impose a legal burden on the accused to prove on the balance of probabilities that no licence was required or that an exception applies. This burden is compatible with Article 6(2) of the European Convention on Human Rights because it is necessary and proportionate in the context of a regulatory offence. The prosecution need only prove the act of felling; no further mens rea is required.

Court Disposition

Application for judicial review dismissed

Orders

  • Application for judicial review dismissed
  • Grundy & Co Excavations Ltd to pay the Forestry Commission £9,693.75 in respect of the applications