Marshall v Clark [1957] ScotHC HCJ_1 (11 June 1957)

Marshall v Clark [1957] ScotHC HCJ_1 (11 June 1957)

The presence of general terms such as 'reasonable precautions' in a regulation does not prevent the regulation from creating an offence, nor does it render a complaint based on such regulation irrelevant, provided the complaint gives fair notice of the alleged offence. The prior authority of Allan v Howman is expressly overruled.

Citation
[1957] ScotHC HCJ_1
Parties
Appellant: Marshall; Respondent: Clark
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
11 June 1957
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (stated Case) / Appellate (high Court of Justiciary, Five Judge Bench)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; objection to relevancy repelled.
Legal Topics
Statutory Interpretation, Relevancy of Criminal Complaints, Fair Notice in Criminal Procedure, Vagueness in Criminal Offences
Criminal Law Administrative Law Statutory Interpretation Relevancy of Criminal Complaints Fair Notice in Criminal Procedure Vagueness in Criminal Offences

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Marshall

Appellant

Clark

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (stated Case) / Appellate (high Court of Justiciary, Five Judge Bench)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the use of general terms such as 'reasonable precautions' in statutory regulations renders a criminal charge based on such regulations irrelevant or void for vagueness
  2. 2 Whether a complaint that follows the general wording of a regulation provides fair notice to the accused

Ratio Decidendi

The presence of general terms such as 'reasonable precautions' in a regulation does not prevent the regulation from creating an offence, nor does it render a complaint based on such regulation irrelevant, provided the complaint gives fair notice of the alleged offence. The prior authority of Allan v Howman is expressly overruled.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; objection to relevancy repelled.

Orders

  • First question answered in the affirmative; regulation capable of creating an offence.
  • Sheriff-substitute's decision to convict upheld.