Lafortune v R (CN 02 2017) [2017] SCSC 360 (12 April 2017)

Lafortune v R (CN 02 2017) [2017] SCSC 360 (12 April 2017)

The Magistrate had discretion under Section 27(1)(a) of the Road Transport Act to suspend the licence, but in the circumstances of the case, the sentence was harsh and excessive, and the suspension order should be quashed while the fine is maintained.

Citation
[2017] SCSC 360
Parties
Appellant: Hazel Lafortune; Respondent: The Republic
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Seychelles
Judgment Date
12 April 2017
Case Number
CN 02 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Driving Under the Influence, Sentencing, Licence Suspension
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Road Traffic Law Driving Under the Influence Sentencing Licence Suspension

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

Parties

Hazel Lafortune

Appellant

The Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence imposed by the Magistrate was wrong in law or principle
  2. 2 Whether the suspension of the driving licence was lawful under the applicable statutes and regulations
  3. 3 Whether the sentence was harsh and manifestly excessive

Ratio Decidendi

The Magistrate had discretion under Section 27(1)(a) of the Road Transport Act to suspend the licence, but in the circumstances of the case, the sentence was harsh and excessive, and the suspension order should be quashed while the fine is maintained.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Order of suspension of driving licence quashed
  • Fine of SR5000 maintained