AG v APBS and Hoban [2002] JRC 161 (30 August 2002)

AG v APBS and Hoban [2002] JRC 161 (30 August 2002)

The fines imposed are reasonable and proportionate in light of the deliberate and knowing breaches of housing law, and there is no double jeopardy as the totality of the fines is considered.

Citation
[2002] JRC 161
Parties
Defendant: Mr. Hoban; Defendant: Defendant Company; Prosecutor: Attorney General
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
30 August 2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentencing
Outcome
convicted and fined
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Housing Offences, Double Jeopardy, Mitigation
Criminal Law Housing Law Sentencing Housing Offences Double Jeopardy Mitigation

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 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr. Hoban

Defendant

Defendant Company

Defendant

Attorney General

Prosecutor

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the fines imposed constitute double jeopardy given the defendant's relationship to the company
  2. 2 Appropriateness and totality of fines for deliberate breaches of housing law

Ratio Decidendi

The fines imposed are reasonable and proportionate in light of the deliberate and knowing breaches of housing law, and there is no double jeopardy as the totality of the fines is considered.

Court Disposition

convicted and fined

Orders

  • Defendant company fined £1,500 on charge 1 and £1,000 on charge 2
  • Mr. Hoban fined £1,500 or 2 months' imprisonment in default on charge 1