DEFENCE UPHELD

Auckland Star, Volume LXXIII, Issue 56, 7 March 1942, Page 5

DEFENCE UPHELD

NOT "THE OCCUPIER"

(0.C.) CHRISTCHURCH, Frida;. The defence that, under the Liglr ing Restriction Emergency Regu\, tions, no one could be held respoi: sible in a Court of law for breacheof the regulations in ofiices occupies by the Crown was up ho : d in ihi Magistrate's Court, when Gcovgc Hugh McLean, district traffic manager for the Ra.;\.ay Department, pleaded not puilty to a charge r>:' allowing a light to «ho\v in railway offices during a blackout. Mr. ('Jjvsson. couiisti for -he defence, submitted that ihe regulation' under which the- charge wa> laiJ failed tu tir-rinc- the word ivcupier. MclA-an could not be termed the actual occupier of the building: he could not. for instance, be held responsible for the rates or other payments connected with the buildincr. The Crown was prima facie the occ.ipier.

The Magistrate: And the Crown, o course, can do no wrong. That".rather a pity; the £200 pena:i\ would be ra".her useful.

It was a clear case of casus omisfup, and the mistake had arisen because the term occupier had nor been clearly donned by -ho r ecu la lion.*, the magistrate said, in ditmUeing the charge.