7,424 judgments 29,712 public-register documents 143,540 judgment pages 132,515 public-register pages 276,055 total pages
Judgment

Tony Allen James v R

SCA 0012/1986 · 1986-09-25

Unlawful driving of motor vehicle

Full metadata
Legislation cited
Statute Sections cited Mentions
Traffic Act 66 2
Full text10 paragraphs Download PDF

Use paragraph links to cite this judgment, or download the original PDF. Select text to copy a passage.

In the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands — Criminal Division
Cause No. SCA 0012/1986
Between
Tony Allen James
- v -
R
Before
Summerfield CJ
Judgment delivered 1986-09-25

IN THE GRAND COURT OF THE CAYMAN ISLANDS
HOLDEN AT GEORGE TOWN, GRAND CAYMAN
BEFORE THE HON. CHIEF JUSTICE, SIR JOHN SUMMERFIELD

Case No. 1415/85
Summary Court Appeal No. 12/86.

BETWEEN
TONY ALLEN JAMES
APPELLANT
AND
REGINA
RESPONDENT

Charles Quin Esq. for appellant
Brian Sharman Esq. for respondent

REASONS FOR DECISION

This appeal was against a conviction for an offence against section 66 of the Traffic Law. The particulars allege that the appellant "unlawfully drove (his vehicle, a Ford Van) along Gun Square Road, Bodden Town, without reasonable consideration for other persons". At the conclusion of the hearing the appeal was allowed on that charge. It was intimated that reasons would follow. These are those reasons.

Apparently revised reasons for judgment, dated 11th September 1986, state: "I accept the evidence given by the witnesses for the prosecution and found as a fact that the defendant ... drove without due care and attention." The words "and drove without due care and attention" were not contained in the original record prepared, but nothing need turn on that in view of the decision on the more fundamental point apparent from the record.

In short the finding is at variance with the terms of the charge. It is not clear how this come about. The brief reasons for judgment do not deal with the point. However, the fact remains that the charge alleged
driving without reasonable consideration for other persons while the finding, without specifying any facts in support, was that the appellant drove without due care and attention. Both these related offences are set out in section 66 of the Traffic Law, but they remain different in substance. It is not out of place to observe that the conflicting facts in the evidence would require careful analysis and assessment to justify a finding under section 66. Clearly, in the circumstances, it would be unsafe to allow the conviction on this charge to stand and, accordingly, it was set aside.

25th September 1986.

Sir John Summerfield.

Find similar