Jersey Unreported Judgments

K P G Investments Ltd

1 count of contravening Article 2(1) of the Lodging Houses (Registration) (Jersey) Law, 1962, by keeping an unregistered lodging house (count 1).

1 count of contravening Article 14(1)(a) of the Housing (Jersey) Law, 1949, as amended, by failing to comply with a condition of a Housing Committee consent to the lease to the defendant company of dwelling accommodation, that the accommodation should not, without Housing Committee consent, be let to persons other than those approved by the Committee as being in a category specified in paragraph (1)(a)-(h) of Regulation 1 of the Housing (General Provisions) (Jersey) Regulations, 1970.

Plea:Facts admitted

Details of Offence:

The company held the lease of premises which had 63 occupants over a nine week period at £55-£56 per week per occupant. The premises were registered as a hotel but the Tourism registration had lapsed. No application was made to register as a lodging house. The Managers flat was occupied by a non-residentially qualified director/shareholder in breach of conditions on housing consent.

Details of Mitigation:

Substantial. Short duration of breach; no intent to break the law; remorse; ignorance of law, complied with other requirements; absence of significant profit from illegality; co-operative; clean record; charge admitted.

Previous Convictions: None

Conclusions:

Count 1:£4,500 fine

Count 2:£1,250 fine; £1,000 costs, jointly and severally with Mr Gibb

Sentence and Observations of the Court:

Counts 1 and 2: conclusions granted. It is the responsibility of those who engage in trade and commerce to acquaint themselves with the Laws and Regulations. Statutory requirement is to protect lodgers.

Edward James Gibb

1 count of contravening Article 14(1)(a) of the Housing (Jersey) Law, 1949, as amended, by failing to comply with a condition of a Housing Committee consent to lease to K P G Investments Ltd (of which the defendant was a director) of dwelling accommodation, that the accommodation should not, without Housing Committee consent, be let to persons other than those approved by the Committee as being in a category specified in paragraph (1)(a)-(h) of Regulation 1 of the Housing (General Provisions) (Jersey) Regulations, 1970.

Age:34

Plea:Facts admitted

Details of Offence:

Director of K P G Investments Ltd and accordingly in breach of Housing consent granted to that company when the manager’s flat was occupied by non-residentially qualified people.

Details of Mitigation:

Clean record; co-operative

Previous Convictions: None

Conclusions:

£1,250 fine, or 1 months imprisonment, in default of payment; £1,000 costs, jointly and severally with company.

Sentence and Observations of the Court:

Conclusions granted

T J Le Cocq Esq., Crown Advocate

Advocate P C Sinel for the accused

JUDGMENT

THE BAILIFF: Those who engage in trade or commerce involving real property in this Island have a duty to acquaint themselves with the laws and regulations which govern that trade. This is, perhaps, particularly relevant in the context of this case, for it appears that the defendant, Mr Gibb, is in partnership with a man who himself is the owner or operator of a registered lodging house. If, therefore, the defendant, Mr Gibb, was unaware of his obligations it appears to the Court that he closed his eyes to what ought to have been obvious had he applied his mind to the matter.

On the other hand the Court has given anxious consideration to a number of mitigating factors properly urged by counsel on his behalf. It is true that the infractions continued only for a short time and that once the visit of the Housing Officer had taken place, the defendant took steps immediately to comply, so far as he could, with his obligations. It is also the case that he equipped himself with a police register and that he did comply with certain obligations in relation to fire precautions and other matters which, as counsel urges upon us, were within his knowledge as being his obligations.

At the end of the day, however, the statutory requirement which exists to register a lodging house is there for the protection of lodgers who are entitled to expect minimum standards which are laid down by the Housing Committee for such occupiers. Both counsel have told us that the agreed illicit profit which we ought to remove from the company is £500. That being so we consider that the fines moved for by the Crown Advocate pay proper regard to the mitigating factors which have been laid before us by counsel. The conclusions are accordingly granted and on count 1 the defendant company is fined £4,500; on count 2, it is fined £1,250 and on the single count against Mr Gibb, he is fined £1,250 or one months imprisonment in default of payment. We order both defendants jointly and severally to pay the prosecution costs in the sum of £1,000. The Court will allow you ten days in which to pay.

A.G. -v- Lido Bay Hotel Ltd & Anor (27 March 1996) Jersey Unreported