R v Ingleton and Warren

• Jurisdiction: Jamaica
• Judge: MacGregor, C.J.
• Judgment Date: 07 January 1959
• Neutral Citation: JM 1959 CA 1
• Court: Court of Appeal (Jamaica)
• Date: 07 January 1959

Court of Appeal

MacGregor, C.J.; Cools-Lartigue, J.A.; Small, J.A.

R.

and

Ingleton and Warren

Appearances:

Moody, Q.C., for the appellant Ingleton.

Thompson for the appellant Warren.

Parnell for the Crown

Criminal law - Conspiracy — Driver's licence — Certificate of competence — False statement in certificate of competence — Road Traffic Law, Cap.346, s.14(1)

MacGregor, C.J.

1 The appellants were convicted in the Resident Magistrate's Court, Kingston, on an indictment containing eighteen counts. The first count, upon which both were convicted charged them with conspiracy. The other seventeen counts charged Ingleton alone with offences contrary to s.33 (1) of the Larceny Law, Cap.212 [J.] and of them he was convicted on eight. The particulars of the first count were they conspired together and with other persons unknown to contravene the provisions of s.14 (1) of the Road Traffic Law, Cap. 346 [J.], by procuring the grant of drivers' licences to certain applicants by the production of certificates of competence purporting to be issued in accordance with the provisions of Regulation 43 of the Road Traffic Regulations [J.]. Each of the other counts charged Ingleton with similar offences, differing from each other only in respect of the date and the person. He was charged that with intent to defraud he procured a driver's licence to be delivered to the person named for his use by falsely pretending that a certificate of competence was issued in accordance with the Road Traffic Law to the person named, that he had personally examined the person named as to his competence and that that person had complied with all the requirements of s.14 (1) of the Road Traffic Law.

2 The appellant Warren kept a driving school at 6 Rainford Road in Kingston, and, as an instructor, taught pupils to drive and assisted them to get their drivers' licences. The appellant Ingleton was a certifying officer under the Road Traffic Law, having been appointed in 1953 when he was stationed in Kington. He then became acquainted with the appellant Warren. From September 1st, 1956, to October 1st, 1957, Ingleton was stationed in Trelawny. From time to time persons, who resided in the Corporate Area, paid fees to the appellant Warren to be taught to drive and to be helped to obtain their drivers' licences. Having given them some lessons, Warren gave each an application form for a driver's licence. Each person filled up the application form, attached his photograph and, where necessary, obtained the certificates of character and of health, and then handed the form to Warren. Subsequently the form was returned and attached to it was a certificate of competence signed by the appellant Ingleton for the Traffic Area Authority, but the address of each applicant had been altered from one in the Corporate Area to one in Trelawny. Upon tender of the documents and £1, the licence fee, the Collector of Taxes thereupon issued a driver's licence to the applicant. In no case did the applicant take any test to show his competence to drive a motor vehicle.

3 We consider now the first count of conspiracy, the material words of which are:

• (a)“to contravene the provisions of s.14 (1) of the Road Traffic Law, Cap.346,”

• (b)“by procuring the grant of drivers' licences to certain applicants,”

• (c)“by the production of certificates of competence purporting to be issued f in accordance with the provisions of Regulation 43.”

4 Counsel for the appellants submitted that there was no offence disclosed in count, that s.14 (1) is a procedural section creating no offence, and that if...