Rabet v AG

count of refusing to leave licensed premises, contrary to Article 17(3) of the Licensing (Jersey) Law 1974, as amended.

The appellant appeals against a decision of the Magistrate on the 27 th June. On that occasion the Magistrate convicted him of two offences; namely refusing to quit licensed premises contrary to Article 17(3) of the Licensing (Jersey) Law 1974 , and resisting police officers in the execution of their duties. At the same time he was acquitted of certain other offences.

The appellant's version of events was quite different. Although he accepted that there was a question as to whether he had been barred from the public house, Mrs Dryhurst had not specifically asked him to leave that evening, or otherwise he would have done so. Nor did he resist arrest by the police officers. When the police attempted to put the handcuffs on him it hurt him and caused him pain. He reacted instinctively to avoid the pain by straightening his arm.

We remind ourselves of the test to be applied on an appeal as taken from A.G. -v- Little (12 th September, 1994):-

"The ground of appeal is that the Learned Magistrate's decision is not one to which he could reasonably have come in the circumstances. The ground of appeal embodies the legal test for this court. It is not for us to substitute our own view for the view arrived at by the Magistrate. The Magistrate saw and heard the witnesses, and he had the opportunity to observe their demeanour as they gave evidence before him. Our task is to examine the evidence in order to ascertain whether there was evidence upon which the Magistrate could reasonably rely in reaching the conclusion at which he arrived."