The Gazette 1958-61

I959> it states that all existing Judges and Justices shall have priority in being appointed to the new Courts. Excluding the Chief Justice and the presidents of the High Court, the Circuit Court and District Court, this Bill limits ordinary Supreme Court Judges to four, and ordinary High Court Judges to six, ordinary Judges of the Circuit Court to eight, and District Court Justices to thirty four. Many of the provisions of the Courts of Justice Acts have been re-enacted, such as the qualifications for appointment as a judge, emoluments, retiring age, pension rights, jurisdiction, etc. As regards the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court, no less than 71 different kinds of proceedings are listed in the Fourth Schedule, and the Fifth Schedule lists 29 old British Statutes which are still effective in that Court. The jurisdiction of the Cork Circuit Judge in Admiralty and Bankruptcy matters is fully set out. Henceforth a trial may not generally be transferred from the Circuit Criminal Court to the Central Criminal Court unless seven days notice is given either by the accused or by the Attorney-General. The President of the District Court may inquire into the conduct of a Justice if he consider it prejudicial to the prompt and efficient discharge of the business of the Court. Justices shall be compelled to attend twice yearly meetings summoned by the President of the District Court to discuss matters relating to the discharge of business. The continuity of the administration and enforcement of justice shall not be interrupted by the coming into operation of these Acts. The Courts (Supplemental Provisions) Bill 1959 contains 56 Sections, and no less than 8 Schedules ; it is accom panied by an explanatory memorandum which sets out in detail the particular sections of the Court of Justice Acts which have been repealed ; it is hoped to introduce in due course a comprehensive Courts (Consolidation) Bill which will embody all sections of the Courts of Justice Acts in existence at its enactment. The Courts (Supplemental Provisions) Bill 1959—together with explanatory memo randum—may be obtained from the Government Publications Sale Office, Henry Street Arcade, Dublin, for 3/6 (or 3/10 including postage).

affecting the rights of people charged with dealing in smuggled goods as to their mode of trial. While holding that the charges concerned did not constitute a criminal offence, they gave a majority decision that the offences were minor ones which could be tried by a District Justice. The Supreme Court decisions affects a number of charges pending against defendants in the district courts for dealing in butter, the import of which had been prohibited, and which had been adjourned pending the Supreme Court ruling. The appeal had been brought by Peter Melling, commercial traveller, Putland Road, Bray, Co. Wicklow, against the dismissal by the High Court of his action seeking a declaration that charges brought against him under the Customs Consolidation Act, 1876, of dealing in a quantity of butter, the import of which had been prohibited, were not minor offences but criminal charges entitling him to be tried by a jury. The appeal had been at hearing in the Supreme Court for 17 days. All five judges held against the contention of the Attorney-General, and Joseph O'Mahony, an officer of Customs and Excise, that the charges did not constitute a criminal offence but by a majority decision (Maguire C. J., Lavery and Martin Maguire JJ.—Kingsmill Moore and O Dalaigh JJ. dissenting) they found that the offence charged was a minor one —as provided for in the Constitution—which could be tried summarily by a district justice. The charges against Mr. Melling related to knowingly dealing in approximately z| tons of butter, the importation of which was prohibited on various dates in 1957. The questions involved in the appeal were stated to be of very high constitutional importance and it was also stated that there was a back-log of other cases awaiting the decision of the Supreme Court. In view of the importance of the issues, and the fact that Mr. Melling had succeeded in establishing that customs offences involved criminal charges, the Court directed that he be required to pay the Attorney-General's costs of the hearing in respect of five days only. Mr. Justice Lavery, in his judgment, with which the Chief Justice and Mr. Justice Martin Maguire, agreed, stated that notwithstanding his decision that the offences charged against Mr. Melling were triable summarily, there were cases—depending on the election by the Revenue authorities as to penalty— in which a district justice could decide that the case was one proper to be tried by a jury. Melling v. O'Mahony—unreported—Judgment of the Supreme Court on 8th February, 1961— Irish Independent, 9th February, 1961.

DECISIONS OF PROFESSIONAL INTEREST

Customs offences may in certain cases be tried by a Judge and a Jury, but this particular case being a minor one, can be tried summarily by a District Justice. The Supreme Court in a reserved judgment yesterday found for the Revenue Commissioners in an important appeal from Mr. Justice McLoughlin