Att. Gen. v Ryan [1965] JJ 543 (22 December 1965)

Att. Gen. v Ryan [1965] JJ 543 (22 December 1965)

The court held that where there is ambiguity in the expression of a sentence, the intention of the court as expressed in open court prevails over the wording of the Act of Court.

Citation
[1965] JJ 543
Parties
Applicant: Attorney General; Respondent: Ryan
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
22 December 1965
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Appeal
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Sentence, Ambiguity, Court Intention
Criminal Law Procedure Sentence Ambiguity Court Intention

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Attorney General

Applicant

Ryan

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 How should ambiguity in the expression of a criminal sentence be resolved?

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that where there is ambiguity in the expression of a sentence, the intention of the court as expressed in open court prevails over the wording of the Act of Court.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Ambiguity in sentence resolved in accordance with court's intention as expressed in open court