Cave v Mountain
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1840 |
| Date | 01 January 1840 |
| Court | Court of Common Pleas |
English Reports Citation: 133 E.R. 330
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
S. C. 1 Scott, N. R. 132; 9 L. J. M. C. 90. Discussed, Kemp v. Neville, 1861, 10 C. B. (N. S.) 550. Referred to, Livingstone v. Westminster Corporation, [1904] 2 K. B. 119.
[257] cave v. mountain. 1840. [S. C. 1 Scott, .N. E. 132; 9 L. J. M. C. 90. Discussed, Kemp v. Neville, 1861, 10 C. B. (N. S.) 550. Referred to, Livingstone v. Westminster Corporation, [1904] 2KB. 119.] A magistrate who commits a party in a case where he has no jurisdiction, is liable to an action of trespass; but where, supposing the facts alleged to be true, the magistrate has jurisdiction, his liability to be sued, or his exemption from such liability on the ground of jurisdiction, cannot be affected by the truth or falsehood of those facts, or by the sufficiency or insufficiency of the evidence adduced for the purpose of establishing them.-An information brought before a magistrate, which charges an offence within his cognizance, is sufficient to give the magistrate jurisdiction, and to protect him in an action for false imprisonment, although the information disclose no legal evidence against the alleged offenders, and even although it purport to be founded upon inadmissible hearsay evidence.-In a case where the period for which a party has been committed for further examination appeared to the court to be too long, yet the jurors having, to the satisfaction of the Judge at Nisi Prius, found that the detention was not excessive, a rule nisi for a new trial was refused.-Held, that knowledge on the part of the committing magistrate, that the prisoner will be subjected to restrictions unnecessarily severe, in the gaol to which the commitment is made, does not make the magistrate a trespasser, unless he expressly direct such treatment to be adopted in the particular case. Trespass, for assaulting and imprisoning the plaintiff. Plea, not guilty (). At the trial at the last Hertford assizes, before Lord Abinger C, B., the following facts appeared. (c) Vide ante, 249 (a). (d) And see Parker v. Curson, Cro. Jac. 529, 530. S. C. not S. P. 2 Eoll. Eep. 90. (a) Under 7 Jac. 1, c. 5, s. 1. And see Daubney v. Cooper, 5 Mann. & E. 314. 10 B. & C. 237. The power enjoyed by justices of the peace, &c., of giving special matter in evidence under the plea of the general issue, is not taken away by the new I MAN. &e. 258. CAVE U MOUNTAIN 331 On Tuesday, the 5th of February 1839, the plaintiff was taken into custody (b)1 by Fan-edge and Pannell, two [258] police-officers, by the direction and in the presence of Wilson, who was gardener to a clergyman of the name of Butt, upon a charge of having feloniously cut down trees in Mr. Butt's garden (a). The plaintiff' was handcuffed and shut up in the parish cage. Upon his being brought the next morning before the defendant (also a clergyman) as a magistrate for the county of Herts, Wilson stated, as a complainant (b)2, and deposed as a [259] witness, that twenty young trees, chiefly rules of pleading, H. 4- W. 4, the statue 3 & 4 W. 4, c. 42, having expressly reserved such rights. But, by E. T. 1 Viet., unless the defendant insert in the margin of such plea the words " By statute," such plea is to be taken not to have been pleaded by virtue of any act of parliament, 4 New Cases, 816, 8 A. & E. 279. (b)1 By 7 & 8 G. 4, c. 30, s. 28, " for the more effectual apprehension of all offenders against this act," it is enacted, " That any person found committing any offence against this act, whether the same be punishable by an indictment, or upon...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
The King (Martin) v Mahony
... ... In Cave v. Mountain ( 1 ), Tindal, C.J., states (p. 262) that “if the charge be of an offence over which, if the offence charged be true in fact, the ... ...
-
Ming v Greaves (Magistrate)
...C.B., said that there was a remedy against a justice if he had acted maliciously and, in Cave v MountainENRENR(1840) 1 Man & G 257; 133 ER 330, Tindal, C.J., said that a justice who commits a person to prison may be liable in trespass. [18] But, these cases are all distinguishable from Bush......
-
State (O'Flaherty) v O'Floinn
... ... Capper (1) ), and three days, reasonable ( Scavage v. Tateham (2) ). The reasonableness of the period is a question for the jury ( Cave v. Mountain (3) )."The judgments in Davis v. Capper (1) bear out the accuracy of this summary and it may, I think, be taken, as a correct statement ... ...
-
Ming v Greaves
...C.B., said that there was a remedy against a justice if he had acted maliciously and, in Cave v. Mountain (1840), 1 Man. & G. 257; 133 E.R. 330, Tindal, C.J., said that a justice who commits a person to prison may be liable in trespass. [18] But, these cases are all distinguishable from Bus......