Quarter Sessions
| Published date | 01 July 1948 |
| Date | 01 July 1948 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/002201834801200302 |
| Subject Matter | Quarter Sessions |
Quarter Sessions
PRODUCTION
OF SAMPLES
UPON
APPEAL
FROM CONVICTIONS
UNDER
THE
FOOD &
DRUGS
ACT, 1938
Holland u. Dickenson
A
QUESTION
upon which no previous decision
has
been
reported was considered
by
the
Appeal Committee
of
the
Cheshire Quarter Sessions on
the
7th
January,
1948.
The
facts of
the
case are
that
a sale of milk,
not
of
the
nature, substance
and
quality demanded
by
the
purchaser,
had
been proved before a Court of
Summary
Jurisdiction
to
have
been due to
the
act
or default of
the
appellant
Holland, who was accordingly convicted of an offence
under sections 3
and
83 of
the
Food
and
Drugs Act, 1938,
and
fined £10.
Against this conviction Holland appealed
to
Quarter
Sessions
and
asomewhat difficult question arose as
to
the
procedure on appeal. Section 80 (4) of
the
Act provides
that
the
sample of
the
food concerned, which
the
authorities
are required to procure, "shall be produced
at
the
hearing".
The
purpose of such production appears to be
that
set
out
in s, 82 (1), viz.,
that
the
court may,
if
it
thinks fit,
and
upon
the
request of either
party
shall, send
the
sample
to
the
government chemist for analysis.
In
the
present case
the
sample was dulyproduced before
the
justices
and
neither
they
nor either of
the
parties required
it
to be analysed.
Between
the
summary proceedings
and
the
hearing of
the
appeal
the
sample was destroyed
and
could therefore
not
be produced before
the
Appeal Committee.
It
was submitted on behalf of
the
appellant
that
the
word 'hearing' in s. 80 (4) included an appeal. Neither
counsel
had
been able
to
discover
any
reported decision
bearing on
the
matter,
but
the
court after consideration
held
that
the
section did extend
to
appellate hearings
and
253
To continue reading
Request your trial