Jersey Unreported Judgments

2001/19

3 pages

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

 

19^th January, 2001

 

 

Before:  M.C. St. J. Birt, Esq., Deputy Bailiff, and

Jurats Myles and Allo

 

The Attorney General

-v-

Jose Luis Rocha Ribeiro

 

 

1 count of:   contravening Article 2(1)(b) of the Lodging Houses (Registration) (Jersey) Law, 1962, as amended, by keeping an unregistered lodging house.

 

Age:    42.

 

Plea:   Facts admitted.

 

Details of Offence:

 

Defendant bought property in 1996.  One lodger was already present and a second lodger moved in on the same day as the defendant.  The Housing Officer called on 20^th June, 2000, and found that since 16^th January, 2000, there had been seven lodgers on the premises.  It was accepted that a couple and their infant who were also resident at the premises were not lodgers but relatives of the defendant who paid no rent.  The profit made over and above what the defendant could have legally received in rent was 22 weeks at £115 = £2,530.

 

Details of Mitigation:

 

Defendant was co-operative and did not break the law cynically.  It appeared to be a genuine mistake of law by the defendant who recorded the names of the lodgers in his police register for inspection.

 

Previous Convictions:    Minor motoring offences.

 

Conclusions:

 

£3,000 fine or 3 months' imprisonment in default of payment plus £250 costs: removal of illicit profit plus fine.

 

Sentence and Observations of the Court:

 

Conclusions granted.  Court accepted offence committed out of ignorance and not deliberate.  8 weeks to pay.

 

 

Mrs. S. Sharpe, Crown Advocate.

Advocate J. Michel for the Defendant.

 

JUDGMENT

 

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

 

1.            We accept that this offence was committed out of ignorance and that it was not a deliberate breach of the law by Mr Ribeiro.  But the fact remains that Mr Ribeiro received a total of £2,530 which he would not have received had he abided by the law.

 

2.            Mr Michel has argued strongly that the conclusions for the Crown should be reduced to £2,500.  This would, he says, reflect the profit earned and the order for costs would be the penalty.

 

3.            We have considered his submissions carefully but we think that, in a matter of this nature, there must be some element of penalty as otherwise the offender is simply left back exactly where he would have been had he not committed the offence.

 

4.            In the circumstances we are going to grant the conclusions of the Crown so that there is a fine of £3,000, together with £250 costs.  As requested by Mr Michel we grant eight weeks in which to pay and there will be a sentence of 3 months' imprisonment in default.

Authorities

 

 

A.G. -v- Muren & Peters (16^th August, 2000) Jersey Unreported.

 

A.G. -v- Allan (5^th March, 1999) Jersey Unreported.

 

A.G. -v- Evans (3^rd November, 1995) Jersey Unreported.

 

A.G. -v- MacKenzie (19^th November, 1990) Jersey Unreported.