Inferior Court
Action No. 6 of 1979
21st March, 1980.
Moe, J.

Mr. G. C. Gandhi for the Appellant
Mr. Edwin Flowers for the Respondent

Criminal Law - Appeal from Inferior Court against sentence - Ground of Appeal sentence too lenient and error of law - Application of section 60 of the Summary Jurisdiction (Procedure) Ordinance, Cap. 24 - Factors to be take into account in determining sentence - Driving uninsured vehicle - Whether a trifling offence.

J U D G M E N T

The Respondent was charged before the Magistrate with two offences viz (1) that on the 25th day of March, 1979 he drove a motor vehicle on Freetown Road in the Belize Judicial District whilst not being the holder of a driving permit contrary to section 29 (1) of Cap. 62 of the Laws of Belize; (ii) that on the said day 25/3/79 he drove a motor car on Freetown Road in the Belize Judicial District when there was not in force, in relation to the use of that vehicle by him, a policy of insurance in respect of third party risks, contrary to section 3(1) of Ordinance No. 14 of 1958.

2. He pleaded guilty to both charges and was convicted of both offences. The magistrate treated both cases under the provisions of alternative (b) of section 60 of Cap. 24 and disqualified the Respondent from obtaining a driving permit for twelve months from the date of conviction.

3. The Appellant being dissatisfied with the sentence now appeals to this Court on the grounds that (i) the Magistrate's determination was erroneous in point of law; (ii) the determination was based on a wrong principle of law; and (iii) the sentence was too lenient.

4. Section 60 of the Summary Jurisdiction (Procedure) Ordinance Cap. 24 reads as follows: "If on the hearing of any complaint it appears to the Court that although the complaint is proved, the offence was, in the particular circumstances of the case, of so trifling a nature that it is inexpedient to inflict any punishment, or any other than a nominal punishment, - (b) the court may, upon convicting the defendant, discharge him conditionally on his giving security, with or without a surety or sureties to the satisfaction of the court, to appear for sentence when called upon or to be of good behaviour, and either without payment of damages and costs, or subject to the payment of damages and costs or either of them which the Court thinks reasonable."

5. It was contended on behalf of the Appellant that (in the context of traffic offences) on no view of the circumstances can the offences be regarded as trifling, and therefore this was not a case which entitled the Magistrate to act under section 60 Cap. 24.

6. It should first be made clear that very wide powers are given to a Magistrate under section 60 Cap. 24 and as Kennedy J. explained in Barnard v Barnard (1906) 1 K.B. 357 when commenting on section 16 of the Summary Jurisdiction Act 1879 (U.K.) which is a similar provision to section 60, "it is very important not to limit the discretion entrusted to justices by s. 16 of the S. J. Act 1879 and this court will not review the exercise of that discretion if there is any substantial ground for the exercise". Thus, it is still the duty of an appellate court to determine whether the discretion was exercised judicially: Quelch v Collett (1948) 1 K. B. 478.

7. The question for my determination, therefore, is whether the Magistrate in the circumstances of this case acted in the proper exercise of the discretion given him. What were the facts showing that the offences may be regarded as trifling and entitling the magistrate to act as he did. He said there were mitigating factors which he accepted. In the plea of mitigation, it was stated that the Respondent held a learner's driving permit, (the permit was produced). He drove the vehicle because while at a party earlier that evening, the owner/driver, a friend of his got high and he, the Respondent, wanted to avoid an accident. While driving, the steering wheel locked. The Respondent is still going to school. In addition he took into account the fact that the Defendant pleaded guilty and has no previous convictions. On those grounds he treated the cases under the provisions of section 60. It was submitted for the Respondent that, in the circumstances, the offences were trivial and the existence of the factors set out in the magistrate's reasons (just outlined) permitted the magistrate to exercise his discretion as he did.

8. Lord Goodard in Taylor v Saycell (1950) 2 K. B. 887 made it clear that Courts can only regard the offence of driving uninsured vehicles as serious, and generally as very serious, and I subscribe to that view. But, it may be that an offence serious in its nature can be rendered trifling by the circumstances under which it was committed.

9. The accused, therefore, on his own plea was convicted of the serious offence of driving a motor vehicle on a road when it was not covered by insurance. Consideration of the factors taken into account by the Magistrate does not show either singly or cumulatively that the offence was rendered trifling by the circumstances under which it was committed. Indeed the Magistrate imposed a disqualification on the Respondent which in itself is a serious punishment reflecting the serious offence in respect of which it was imposed. In the result, the Magistrate cannot be said to have regarded the offences as of a trifling nature and consequently, he could not have properly acted under section 60 Cap. 24.

10. In view of the finding at which I have arrived, the appeal is allowed. The Respondent was convicted of two offences, but one may be said to be the legal result of the other, and I propose to follow the practice usually adopted in such circumstances. For the offence of driving a vehicle on a road whilst not the holder of a valid driving permit, the Respondent is ordered to pay $35.00 in one month or do one month; and for driving the vehicle whilst it was not covered by insurance he is ordered to pay $15.00 in one month or do one month, and he is disqualified from holding or obtaining a driver's licence for a period of twelve months from the date of the conviction.

----------OO----------