The Gazette 1971

Magistrates told to keep records and give reasons Magistrates should always give reasons for their decisions and keep proper records of evidence in trials in their courts, says the Law Society in a report yesterday they sent to the Home Secretary and the Lord Chancellor. Failure to keep proper records of a trial, or to give reasons for a decision, often led to considerable difficulty for those wanting to appeal.

Too many lay magistrates regarded them merely as a procedure that had to be gone through and got over. Apart from the protection of the public, if a case was sent for trial expenses to the legal aid fund, which the public had to pay for, were much greater. In its memorandum the society proposes that both prosecution and the defence should be able to appeal to the Grown Court of the divisional court against the decision of justices on committal for trial. On costs in magistrates court cases, the Society urges that a successful defendant should always recover his costs from public funds unless "he has been the author of his own misfortunes," for example by failing to co-operate with or deliberately obstructing the police. {Daily Telegraph, 15th November 1971)

"A man who has protested his innocence often leaves court without any idea why the magistrates found him guilty," said Mr. David Napley, chairman of the Law Society's criminal law committee, at a Press conference. Despite exhortations from some judges, such as Lord Denning, that they should give reasons for their decisions, magistrates were generally advised not to do so, he claimed. Near Farce In its memorandum, the Law Society urges that in all cases when an appeal might result, a record of the case should be kept by the Clerk of the Court dictating a summary of the proceedings into a recording machine. In only those cases where an appeal was lodged would it be necessary for the court to go to the trouble of providing a transcript. The present procedure for appealing from magis- trates to the divisional court on a point of law was "little short of farcical," said Mr. Napley. Lawyers often had to draw up a case for appeal based on what they thought were the grounds for the magistrates' decision. "There should be some record of the Court's reasons given at the time of the decision and not thought up afterwards." Rules "too legalistic" It was constantly the experience of advocates, says the memorandum, that it was impossible to determine whether a decision adverse to their client was based on law, fact or both. Existing rules for appeal were also too legalistic. A court of the status of the divisional court should be able to exercise a powerful all-embracing jurisdiction over magistrates courts, with minimum regard for pro- cedural technicalities. The society goes on to criticise severely the conduct of conunital proceedings in magistrates courts which it described as "very important protection for the liberty of the subject." In committal proceedings, magistrates have to con- sider whether the prosecution has made out a prima facie case to justify them committing the defendant for trial. "It is fair to say that apart from the stipendiary magistrates the whole of committal proceedings in this country for many years have been conducted in a wholly perfunctory manner," said Mr. Napley.

"The

Income Tax Acts"

Th e F I FTH SUPPLEMENT to t h e loose- leaf v o l ume " The I n c ome Tax Ac t s" h a s now b e en pub l i s h ed — p r i ce 25p (post- a ge 6£p e x t r a ). The s u p p l eme nt em- bodies t he ame n dme n ts ma de by t h e F i n a n ce (No. 2) Act, 1970 a nd t h e F i n a n ce Act, 1971.

Available from the Government Publications Sale Office. G.P.O. Arcade, Dublin 1.

191