Jersey Judgment

Gummar v AG [1994] JCA 001 (10 January 1994)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The court found that the conviction was unsafe and allowed the appeal.

Court disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • conviction set aside

02

Material facts

Parties

Gummar

Appellant

Attorney General

Respondent

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Appeal / Judgment

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

whether the conviction was safe

Party arguments

Applicant
The appellant argued that the conviction was unsafe and should be set aside.
Respondent
The respondent contended that the conviction was proper and should be upheld.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    common law

    A conviction must be safe and supported by evidence.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The court found that the conviction was unsafe and allowed the appeal.

Court disposition

appeal allowed

  • conviction set aside

Source and reliance status

Official court record

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

Court record

Judgment

[1994] JCA 001

[ Home ] [ Databases ] [ World Law ] [ Multidatabase Search ] [ Help ] [ Feedback ] [

DONATE ] Jersey Unreported Judgments You are here:

BAILII >> Databases >> Jersey Unreported Judgments >> Gummar v AG [1994] JCA 001 (10 January 1994) URL: https://www.bailii.org/je/cases/UR/1994/1994_001.html Cite as: [1994] JCA 001, [1994] JCA 1 [ New search ] [ Printable PDF version ] [ Help ] Gummar v AG [1994] JCA 001 (10 January 1994) A HTML version of this file is not available click here or view below the pdf version : [1994] JCA 001 BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII URL: https://www.bailii.org/je/cases/UR/1994/1994_001.html

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

No structured authorities are available for this judgment.

Refer to the full judgment and official source for citations that have not yet been extracted.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.