Divisional Court Cases
| Date | 01 July 1964 |
| DOI | 10.1177/002201836402800303 |
| Published date | 01 July 1964 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
Divisional Court Cases
AVOIDING
PAYMENT
OF FARE:
WHEN
INTENT
FORMED
Bremme v. Dubery
THE above case (1963, 1 fV.L.R. 119) raised a point of some
general importance as it affects all cases where a pas-
senger not having paid his fare before starting his journey
endeavours to avoid paying.
The
relevant statutory provision
is s. 5 (3) (a) of
the
Regulation of Railways Act, 1889, which
provides
that-
"If
any
person-
(a) travels or attempts to travel on a railway without
having paid his fare and with intent to avoid payment
thereof
...
"
The
maximum penalty was increased from 40s. to
£20
by
the
Transport
Act, 1962, s, 84.
On
the
22 February 1963 the defendant was convicted
by a magistrate for the City of London on an information
charging
him
with
the
above offence.
The
facts proved before
the magistrate were that
the
defendant entered atrain at South
Kensington without having previously paid his fare. He
travelled as far as the Bank Station where he alighted and
made his way to a barrier at which aticket inspector was
taking and examining tickets.
The
defendant offered the
inspector 6d. and said 'Holborn' for which this was
the
correct fare.
The
magistrate found
that
the defendant so
acted with intent to avoid paying the correct fare and
that
he
had formed this intention before reaching the barrier. It was
contended for
the
defendant
that
s. 5 (3) (a) of
the
Act
required proof of an intent to avoid payment of the fare while
the
passenger was still travelling and
that
the
prosecution had
failed to establish that
the
defendant had formed any wrongful
intent until after he had alighted from
the
train.
The
defendant appealed by case stated which was heard
on
the
14 November 1963 by a Divisional Court consisting of
Lord
Parker C.].,
Winn
and Fenton Atkinson
JJ.
The
Lord
158
To continue reading
Request your trial