Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Name: Mailei Kalsrap ID: s11133104 LAW 216: Case Summary 1: RD TH

    Uploaded by

    Stephanie Garae
    29 views1 page
    This case summary discusses the State vs. Sang appeal case from 2008 in Fiji. The case involved residents who filed a complaint about noise disturbances from the nearby Suva lawn tennis club that lasted until 1am. While the magistrate initially closed the case because the defendant was practicing lawful rights, the appeal found that the magistrate erred in his test. The appeal substituted a conviction and requested submissions on sentencing from the defense. The magistrate later found the case had merit to continue as patrons denied the music was loud until 1am.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    S11133104_Case Summary 2_Template_LM216 (Autosaved).docx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This case summary discusses the State vs. Sang appeal case from 2008 in Fiji. The case involved residents who filed a complaint about noise disturbances from the nearby Suva lawn tennis club that lasted until 1am. While the magistrate initially closed the case because the defendant was practicing lawful rights, the appeal found that the magistrate erred in his test. The appeal substituted a conviction and requested submissions on sentencing from the defense. The magistrate later found the case had merit to continue as patrons denied the music was loud until 1am.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    29 views1 page

    Name: Mailei Kalsrap ID: s11133104 LAW 216: Case Summary 1: RD TH

    Uploaded by

    Stephanie Garae
    This case summary discusses the State vs. Sang appeal case from 2008 in Fiji. The case involved residents who filed a complaint about noise disturbances from the nearby Suva lawn tennis club that lasted until 1am. While the magistrate initially closed the case because the defendant was practicing lawful rights, the appeal found that the magistrate erred in his test. The appeal substituted a conviction and requested submissions on sentencing from the defense. The magistrate later found the case had merit to continue as patrons denied the music was loud until 1am.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Name: Mailei Kalsrap

    ID: s11133104
    LAW 216: Case Summary 1

    CASE SUMMARY

    1. CASE NAME & CITATION:


    State vs. Sang [2008] FJHC 11; HAAI127.07 (1 February 2008)

    2. NATURE OF CASE: The nature of the case is an Appeal of a common nuisance or public


    nuisance.

    3. FACTS: Synopsis of the case is that the habitants around Suva lawn tennis club file a case to
    the magistrate about the naissances that disturb the residences until 1am in the morning.

    4. ISSUE: May the prosecution close a case just because the defendant is practicing their lawful
    rights?

    5. CONCISE RULE OF LAW: An acceptance that varies the term in section 187, penal code
    should consider a criminal offends and the counsels should appeal for the magistrate to
    revoke his ruling.

    6. HOLDING AND DECISION:  The magistrate was in error from the test he applied. The
    case appeal and substitute a conviction and asked the council to make submissions on
    sentences of the defense, because the prosecution closed the case at first. The magistrate later
    found a case to answer to since the patrons of the Suva lawn tennis club denied that the music
    was loud until 1am. That led to the hearing to continue until 23 rd February 2007. The
    magistrate delivered his judgment on 16th April 2007.

    You might also like