Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Council’s attempt to restrain District Judge from hearing gaming license application is misconceived
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court refuses order sought by way of judicial review restraining a District Judge from hearing an application to grant a gaming license for an amusement hall on the grounds that District Court has jurisdiction to inquire into the validity of any local authority resolutions passed pursuant to relevant legislation.
Gaming and lotteries - Judicial review – town council seeks to restraining District Judge from hearing application for grant of certificate authorising the issue of gaming licence pursuant to s.15 of Gaming and Lotteries Act 1956 - licensing of amusement halls and funfairs – Part III of 1956 Act – area must pass a resolution under s.13 to adopt Part III - company successfully applied for a license in 2009, 2010 and 2011 – town council did not oppose these applications – new town clerk wrote to the company stating the license had been granted in error as there had been no Part III resolution – whether District Judge had jurisdiction to hear application – whether District Court entitled to adjudicate on validity of council resolution passed over 30 years ago – acquiescence – estoppel - District Court has jurisdiction to inquire whether resolution is in force pursuant to s.13 of 1956 Act - constitutionally guaranteed independence of District Court.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
