Brannan v Peek

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Date1947
CourtDivisional Court
[DIVISIONAL COURT] BRANNAN v. PEEK. 1947 Oct. 23. Lord Goddard C.J., Humphreys and Singleton JJ.

Gaming and wagering - Street betting - “Public place” - Public house not a public place - Duty of police officers - Street Betting Act, 1906 (6 Edw. 7, c. 43), s. 1, sub-ss. 1, 4.

A public house is not a “public place” within the meaning of the Street Betting Act, 1906.

Per Lord Goddard C.J.: There is no right of entry into a public house, restricted or otherwise.

Observations disapproving of the practice of police officers themselves committing offences in order to obtain evidence of offences by other persons.

CASE STATED by justices.

At a court of summary jurisdiction sitting at Derby an information was preferred by the respondent, a police inspector, under the Street Betting Act, 1906F1, against the appellant, charging him with frequenting a certain public house, namely, the Chesterfield Arms, Nottingham Road, Derby, for the purpose of receiving bets contrary to s. 1 of the Act.

At the hearing on March 4, 1947, the following facts were proved or admitted. On Saturday, January 18, 1947, one Allen, a police constable, visited the Chesterfield Arms and saw two men writing on slips of paper on the bar counter. The men handed the slips to the appellant together with some money. The appellant used the words: “I hope it wins.” The police constable, who was in plain clothes, informed the appellant that he had come from Stoke-on-Trent to see a football match, which was an untruth, and offered to bet with the appellant a pint of beer on the result. The appellant agreed. Alien then asked the appellant if he could make a bet on a horse in a horse race taking place that day. The appellant agreed that he could and Allen thereupon wrote out a slip with the name of a horse and handed it to the appellant with 2s. cash. The appellant put the slip in a cloth bag and put the money in his pocket. On the following Tuesday, January 21, 1947, Allen again went to the Chesterfield Arms accompanied by another police constable, both in plain clothes. The appellant was doubtful of the character of Allen owing to his continued presence in Derby, but Allen told him he had been staying the week-end with friends at a certain hotel. This, as he admitted, was a lie. Allen again made out a betting slip and handed it to the appellant with 2s. in money. The appellant was reluctant to take it, but did so eventually. Later the same day two police constables accosted the appellant as he was leaving the Chesterfield Arms and obtained from him the bag referred to, which they found to contain six betting slips involving stakes of a total of 1l. 11s. 6d. It was well known that the Chesterfield Arms was a fully licensed inn under the Licensing (Consolidation) Act, 1910. The appellant later made a statement after caution in which he said that he had taken bets regularly in the Chesterfield Arms, but never...

To continue reading

Request your trial
29 cases
  • PP; Teja Singh & Mohamed Nasir
    • Malaysia
    • High Court (Malaysia)
    • 1 January 1949
  • Edun v R
    • Cayman Islands
    • Grand Court (Cayman Islands)
    • 26 June 2002
    ...Phipps, Q.C. and G.W. Hampson for the appellant; Mrs. M. Smith-Andalcio, Crown Counsel, for the Crown. Cases cited: (1) Brannan v. Peek, [1948] 1 K.B. 68; [1947] 2 All E.R. 572, distinguished. (2) Browning v. J.W.H. Watson (Rochester) Ltd., [1953] 1 W.L.R. 1172; [1953] 2 All E.R. 775, refer......
  • Murugiah v PP
    • Malaysia
    • High Court (Malaysia)
    • 1 January 1950
  • Cheng Swee Tiang v PP
    • Malaysia
    • High Court (Malaysia)
    • 1 January 1964
  • Request a trial to view additional results
3 books & journal articles
  • Evidence 1
    • Nigeria
    • DSC Publications Online Sasegbon's Laws of Nigeria. Volume 10. Part I Evidence 1
    • 30 June 2016
    ...in the detection of crime has received the strong condemnation of Lord Goddard, C.J., and Mr Justice Humphreys in Brannon v. Peek (1947), 63 T.L.R. 592 (D.C)- condemnations which deserve the attention of all police authorities. It cannot be emphasized too strongly that the use is one, which......
  • The Superior Orders Defense: a Principal-agent Analysis
    • United States
    • University of Georgia School of Law Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law No. 41-1, 2012
    • Invalid date
    ...2001 CarswellBC 1414, ¶ 20 (Can. B.C.C.A.) (WL); United States v. Konovsky, 202 F.2d 721, 730-31 (7th Cir. 1953); Brannan v. Peek [1948] 1 K.B. 68, at 72 (Eng.). For the realm of torts, see Restatement (Second) of Torts § 121 cmt. i (1965) ("[N]o protection is given to a peace officer who, ......
  • PUBLIC PEACE IN RELATION TO A PUBLIC PLACE
    • Nigeria
    • DSC Publications Online Sasegbon’s Judicial Dictionary of Nigerian Law. First edition P
    • 6 February 2019
    ...appreared for the appellant, submitted that the Horizontal Hotel was a public place and cited in support the case of Brannan v. Peek, (1948) 1 K.B. 68; (1947) 2 All E.R. 527. In that case, the question was whether or not a public house was a place within the definition in section 1 (4) of t......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT