Carberry v Cook [1906] HCA 33

OF AUSTRALIA. 995

(HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA.]

RBERRY . : é . 7 z i APPELLANT;

_ DEFENDANT, AND

2 i ' : . RESPONDENT.

ON APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES.

ice—Appeal to High Court—Special leave—Decision of Supreme Court plainly ¥, 0, or A. "right—Justices Act (N.S.W.) (No. 27 of 1902), sec. 20—Liquor Act (N.S.W.) 1906. | (Wo. 18 of 1898), sec. 107—Jurisdiction of Justices—Nearest Court of Petty = —— Sessions—Juiicial notice. Sypyey,

May 25. 'Sec. 107 of the Liquor Act 1898 provides that the Court of Petty Sessions ©"

nearest to the place where an offence was committed shall, except in certain | > _ eases, have jurisdiction to hear and determine informations and complaints. "Barton and A publican was charged at the Court of Petty Sessions in a country town with OConuee sas wing committed an offence in that town. The magistrate dismissed the nformation on the ground that the onus was on the complainant to show that _ the Court of Petty Sessions was the nearest to the place where the offence was

'committed and no such evidence had been given.

_ The Supreme Court held on appeal that the magistrate should have taken judicial notice of the fact that the Court of Petty Sessions was the nearest, and also that by sec. 20 of the Justices Act 1902 the onus lay on the defendant __ to prove the contrary.

Special leave to appeal from this decision was refused by the High Court on _ the ground that the decision as to the question of judicial notice was plainly Tight, and therefore no question as to the construction of sec. 20 of the Justices ict was involved.

- Special leave to appeal from the decision of the Supreme Court : Cook v. * Carberry, 23 N.S.W. W.N., 75, refused.

H.C. or A. 1906, —

CARBERRY v. Coox.

HIGH COURT [1906

Motion for special leave to appeal from a decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales.