R (Magill) v Crossan
| Jurisdiction | Northern Ireland |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1939 |
| Date | 01 January 1939 |
| Court | King's Bench Division (Northern Ireland) |
- Policy of insurance not in force - Disqualification for holding licence -Motor salesman - Licence required for purpose of business - Whether "special reason" - Motor Vehicles and Road Traffic Act (N.I.), 1930 (20 21 Geo. 5, c. 24), s. 6 (2).
The defendant, who was a motor agent or salesman, was convicted at Petty Sessions of using a motor cycle on the public highway, there not being in force in relation to the user thereof a policy of insurance or security against third party risks in compliance with the Road Traffic Act (N.I.), 1930. Sec. 6 (2) of that Act provides that a person convicted of an offence under the section shall (unless the Court for special reasons thinks fit to order otherwise and without prejudice to the power of the Court to order a longer period of disqualification) be disqualified for holding or obtaining a licence under s. 3 of the principal Act for a period of twelve months from the date of conviction. The magistrate decided not to disqualify the defendant for holding a licence on the ground that the fact that the defendant required the licence for the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
MV Balakrishnan v Public Prosecutor
...George John v PP [1995] 3 SLR (R) 562; [1996] 1 SLR 179 (folld) Kanapathipillai, Re [1960] MLJ 243 (folld) King (Magill), The v Crossan [1939] NI 106 (folld) Mah Kah Yew v PP [1968-1970] SLR (R) 851; [1969-1971] SLR 441 (folld) PP v Akhtar Hussain Mann [1991] 1 SLR (R) 872; [1992] 1 SLR 266......
- DPP v Bristow
-
DPP v Skillington
...decisions from Northern Ireland, Scotland and from England and Wales. The Northern Ireland decision referred to is that of R. v. Crossan [1939] NI 106, which was a case where a magistrate had decided not to disqualify a motor cyclist for driving his motor cycle without insurance because he ......
- Watson v Stoute