[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions >> Ryan & Ors v Rees [2002] EWCA Civ 1151 (12 July 2002) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2002/1151.html Cite as: [2002] LLR 742, [2002] EWCA Civ 1151

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
(Lord Justice Latham and Mr Justice Forbes)

		The Royal Courts of Justice Strand London WC2 Friday 12th July, 2002

1. LORD JUSTICE LAWS: This case has been referred to me for reconsideration under Part 52.16(6) of the Civil Procedure Rules, following a decision by Master Venne that this court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the applicant's application for permission to appeal against an order of the Divisional Court (constituted by Latham LJ and Forbes J) which was made on 19th June 2001.
2. I can explain the relevant facts quite briefly. Mr Ryan and certain co-appellants were convicted of a number of licensing offences in the Magistrates' Court on 22nd February 2000. As was their right they appealed to the Crown Court against conviction. Before hearing the appeal, however, in the applicant's case the court decided that it was necessary to entertain a preliminary issue as to whether or not Mr Ryan was the holder of a certain justices on-licence after 15th May 1998. There seems to have been some confusion on this point perhaps because on 15th May 1998 His Honour Judge Evans, sitting at the Swansea Crown Court, dismissed Mr Ryan's appeal against the licensing justices' decision to revoke his licence on 15th December 1997.
3. However, in the period between these two dates during which the licence was still in force pending the appeal, the licence had come up for renewal and been renewed by the licensing justices on 9th February 1998. So this state of affairs gave rise to the preliminary issue which had to be resolved in order to see whether the applicant had a good appeal against his conviction in the Magistrates' Court.
4. The preliminary issue was heard by His Honour Judge Morton, also at the Swansea County Court, on 20th December 2000. Judge Morton found that on the proper construction of the Licensing Act 1964 the renewed licence had been revoked on 15th May 1998. That issue then went by way of case stated to the Divisional Court, and the Divisional Court took the same view of it as had Judge Morton.
5. The jurisdiction point in the case arises as follows. Having been convicted in the Magistrates' Court the applicant's appeal to the Crown Court was as of right under section 108(1)(b) of the Magistrates Courts Act 1980. His appeal by case stated to the Divisional Court against His Honour Judge Morton's decision on the preliminary issue was subject to the provisions of section 28 and 28A of the Supreme Court Act 1981. Subsection (4) of section 28A provides:

"Except as provided by the Administration of Justice Act 1960 (right of appeal to House of Lords in criminal case), a decision of the High Court under this section is final ..."

6. It is, I fear, inescapable that section 28A(4) applies to this case and therefore inescapable that this court lacks the jurisdiction to entertain Mr Ryan's application for permission to appeal. Master Venne was accordingly quite right and I have no option but to dismiss the application.
7. I should add two things. First of all, Mr Ryan has addressed me personally this morning and done so with great courtesy and moderation. Secondly, I feel some sympathy for him because he has clearly been led to think that the distinct issue that had to be decided in relation to the preliminary point could, so to speak, be hived off from the criminal proceedings and treated as a separate civil matter. That is not right. His appeal to the Divisional Court by way of case stated was only itself possible by virtue of the route I have mentioned under section 28 of the Supreme Court Act 1981. Even if it were possible in some way to categorise the preliminary point in question as civil rather than criminal, still section 28A(4) applied to the case and, as I have said, for that reason there is no right of appeal.
ORDER: Application dismissed for want of jurisdiction. (Order not part of approved judgment)