ESTREATING BAIL

Evening Post, Volume CX, Issue 100, 25 October 1930, Page 14

ESTREATING BAIL

— r-*; ~.- . ■ ' : APPEAL COURT "JUDGMENT. 3 udgment was delivered .by the' Court of Appeal : yesterday : on -a - question .raised ;uuderthe> Crown: Suits ,Act, relating- to. a. ; l'.ec.ognisance of, bail from George ■ Arthur; King; (principal.party) and Robert Grant Scott (surety) to the Cl'OH'H. •.'.■• ' .. .;;.' . '.. '- ~ This was-.an:., application.:l; for the estreat -of a reepgnisance of bail for the appearance of' one George Arthur "King 'to stand bis -trial upon, a charge • of- obtaining-money- by false pretences with- intent to defraud. The accused failed to,appear. • The recognisance was entered into-by the accused, and by, Robert Grant Scott as surety. Application was made to .Mr. Justice Adams, for the estreat, of- the recognisance,. and, tlid' learned: Judge -made an order rempying the; .application into the Court of Appear for determination. The-Court of Appeal, in its judgment,;said;—; ■ . ; : . ■■■ •• , : "By the ■ form,.-■' of : recognisance in operation.in New .Zealand the principal party and the surety severally acknowledge themselves bound to 'forfeit' to the Crown .the sums specified in the recognisance in case the principal party fails to. perform his obligation^in this case the obligation' to appear at the sittings for the trial .of criminal cases at the Supreme' Court at Timaru, aud there surrender himself into the 'custody of the gaoler of..the prison, there to plead to such indictment as might be found against him by the Grand Jury for or in respect of-the charge, on which h-e was held to bail. The idea seems to have suggested-itself that the forfeiture mentioned in section 5 of the., Act-is, a forfeiture-decreed by the Judge. That, however, is not so. We think that the words 'where any person has entered into a recognisance to His Majesty and such recognisance is forfeited' mean where th'o parties to the recognisance. have forfeited the sum specified in the: recognisance by the failure of the principal' party to appear. If ■ that is correct,. then the forfeiture arises at once 'upon and by reason of the failure., to-appear." .: The Appeal, Court."decided that the formal estreat.should bo made-by lh« Judge in the Supreme Court to whom the application was.made, and not by the Court of Appeal,, . •• ~