AG v Muren and Peters [2000] JRC 166 (16 August 2000)

AG v Muren and Peters [2000] JRC 166 (16 August 2000)

Illicit profit is relevant to sentencing for breaches of the Housing (Jersey) Law, 1949, but should only be quantified where readily ascertainable. Otherwise, its existence may be considered as an aggravating factor without mathematical calculation. The broad purposes of the Housing Law and the aggravation of the housing shortage are also relevant factors.

Citation
[2000] JRC 166
Parties
Prosecutor: Attorney General; Defendant: Mrs. Muren; Defendant: Mr. Peters
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
16 August 2000
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentencing Judgment
Outcome
Defendants fined; costs awarded to prosecution.
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Illicit Profit, Breach of Housing Regulations
Criminal Law Housing Law Sentencing Illicit Profit Breach of Housing 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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Attorney General

Prosecutor

Mrs. Muren

Defendant

Mr. Peters

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentencing Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Relevance and calculation of illicit profit in sentencing for breaches of Housing (Jersey) Law, 1949
  2. 2 Appropriate sentencing approach for housing infractions involving unqualified occupants

Ratio Decidendi

Illicit profit is relevant to sentencing for breaches of the Housing (Jersey) Law, 1949, but should only be quantified where readily ascertainable. Otherwise, its existence may be considered as an aggravating factor without mathematical calculation. The broad purposes of the Housing Law and the aggravation of the housing shortage are also relevant factors.

Court Disposition

Defendants fined; costs awarded to prosecution.

Orders

  • Mrs. Muren fined £4,400 or five months and two weeks' imprisonment in default; ordered to pay prosecution costs not exceeding £500.
  • Mr. Peters fined £5,000 or four months' imprisonment in default; ordered to pay prosecution costs not exceeding £500.