Case Number

CrimA 156/63

Date Decided

10-1-1963

Decision Type

Appellate

Document Type

Full Opinion

Abstract

Facts: The respondent was charged with an offence against the Commodities and Services (Control) (Transport of Bread) Order, 1960, for transporting bread in open dirty boxes on the roof of an automobile. He admitted the facts but denied liability on the ground that the Order was ultra vires the Minister of Health who had issued it, according to the terms of the enabling Law, which confined the power to make Orders regarding specified essential matters and in a period only during which a state of emergency prevailed. At first instance this plea was rejected and he was convicted and sentenced, but on appeal to the District Court, the plea was accepted and conviction and sentence were overturned. The Attorney-General appealed.

Held: (1) An activity essential for ensuring orderly daily life in peacetime can well have the same character during a state of emergency.

(2) Since, in view of the existing state of emergency in the country, the legislature found it necessary to derogate from its own powers and set up other law-making machinery to ensure that essential activities be effectively and speedily regulated, the measures taken are valid and for that reason alone are unchallengeable.

(3) An activity may be essential not only economically but also from a medical or hygienic viewpoint.

(4) Obiter, it is desirable that the legislature itself regulate in the normal way those matters which have no direct connection to the dangers stemming from a state of emergency.

JUSTICES

Keywords

Constitutional Law -- Legislation, Constitutional Law -- Separation of Powers

Download

Share

COinS