12
misanees
I had previously certified my opinion to be that, where a summons had been merely referred by the Bench, Mandamus was the only remedy, and that a Certiorari would not lie. On the question whether a Certiorari might be practicable where a Summons having been granted, had been subsequently dismissed, I expressed myself with much reserve, not having the facts before me.
I have now to state that in none of the present cases is Certiorari an available remedy, and (the Summonses having been dismissed upon merely preliminary objections taken by the Magistrates themselves) that Mandamus is, in the latter cases, as in the former, the mode of vindicating the Law; - and that, if ever a Certiorari shall have to be sought at the Suit of the Crown in any case arising under the Summary Jurisdiction of Justices Ordinance, it must be under the prerogative of the Crown alone; - that a faulty and ill-considered Ordinance (10 of 1844) having, by infelicity of expression, excluded all removals by Certiorari in such cases, making it necessary that an application shall first be made to the convicting Justices.
The requisite affidavits having been...
12
muisanees
I had previouely certified my opinion to be that, where a summons
had been merely refered by the Bench,
Mandammus was
was the
the only remety, and
Mue.
that a Certiorari would not lie. on the question whether a Certiorari might
practicable where, a Summons having been granted, had been subsequently Lismissed, Pexpressed myself with
musenty recere, not having the frets before
I have now to state that in none of the present cases is Certionari
available remedy, and, (the Summonses having been dismissed upon merely preliminary objections taken by the Magistrates themselves)
>
of
189
3
that mandanus is, in the latter clase
eares, as in the former, the mode of vindicating the Law; - and -(20) that,
if ever a Certiorari shall have to de
4ம் ே
سا
hought at the Suit of the Crown in am
under the Summary
Case
arising
Eurisdiction of Justices' brdinance, _ !
of
after judgment - it must be under the prerogative of the Crown alone; - that faulty and illṛenned Adinanec
a Curious
(1.10 of 1844) having by. infelicity of expression, excluded all
removals
Artionni in such cases.
masting it necessary that
>
by
hit an
application shall
fict
be made to
the convicting Justices.
The requisite affidavits Laving
-
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.