10.07.2015 Views

By Evarist Baimu Nyaga Mawalla - Home

By Evarist Baimu Nyaga Mawalla - Home

By Evarist Baimu Nyaga Mawalla - Home

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

dishonoured, or if he had broken the conditions of the licence-the Minister couldrevoke it. But when the licensee has done nothing wrong at all, I do not think theMinister can lawfully revoke the licence, at any rate, not without offering him hismoney back, and not even then except for good cause. If he should revoke itwithout giving reasons, or for no good reasons, the courts can set aside hisrevocation and restore the licence. It would be a misuse of the power conferredon him by Parliament: and these courts have the authority – and, I would add, theduty- to coreect a misuse resent it or wan us of the consequences if we do.Padfield v Minister of Agriculture, fisheries and Food. (1968) A.C.997 is proof ofwhat I say. It show that are bad in law- the courts can interfere so as to get himback on the right road.With respect we adopt Lord DENNING’s reasoning in the above passage. Wecan find nothing in reason or common sense to indicate that the principle statedby Lord DENNING is inapplicable to a case involving a revocation of grant of aright of occupancy.Now then, applying the accepted principle to the fact of the present case theposition appears to be: while the President has power under subsection (1) ofs.10 of the Land Ordinance to revoke any grant of a right of occupancy for goodcause, he cannot do so unless the conditions prescribed by law for its exerciseare fulfilled. The Act states in no unambiguous terms that: it shall not be lawful forthe President to revoke a right of occupancy granted as aforesaid save for goodcouse”. We have, we think, already abundantly demonstrated why the decision643

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!