Office of the Director of

Public Prosecutions

‘To No One Will We Sell, To No One Deny or Delay Justice’ Chapter 40, Magna Carta 1215

E-Newsletter Issue 40

September 2014

IN THIS ISSUE September 2014- Issue 40

Page 1

EDITORIAL TEAM

Mrs Zaynah Essop, State Counsel Mr Ashley Victor, Public Relations Officer

Mr Nitish Bissessur, LRO Mr Toshan Rai Bundhun, LRO

Mr Yashvind Kumar Rawoah, LRO Mr Ajmal Toofany, LRO

We look forward to hear about your comments/suggestions on:

odppnewsletter@gmail.com

Editorial Pg 2

Appointment of Honourable Mr Iqbal Maghooa and Honourable Mrs Gaitree Jugessur-Manna as Puisne Judges

Pg 3

Disability Rights Today: The challenges of disability inclusion

Pgs 4-5

ADN: L’Analyse génétique des caractères morphologiques apparents Pg 6

Visit of ‘Youth leadership training program’ participants at the ODPP Pg 7

Advocacy Training by Mrs Maura McGowan QC Pgs 8-9

Advocacy highlights Pg 10

Mauritius 2014 Chevening Scholars announced Pg 11

Tribute to late Sir Maurice Latour-Adrien, former Chief Justice and DPP Pg 12

Summary of Supreme Court Judgments – August 2014 Pgs 13-14

EDITORIAL

September 2014- Issue 40

Dear Readers,

As we reach the third term court session, Honourable Mr Iqbal Maghooa, former Deputy DPP and Honourable

Mrs Gaitree Jugessur-Manna, former Master and Registrar, have both been appointed as Puisne Judges of the

Supreme Court. We seize this opportunity to congratulate them and to wish them all the best as they embark in

their new career. Mr Vignesh Ellayah, State Counsel at the ODPP, has been awarded the Chevening scholarship to

pursue an LLM in International Banking and Finance at the University College London.

In August 2014, the officers of the ODPP followed a one-week advocacy training by Mrs Maura McGowan QC. At

the same time, we were honoured by the visit of the Youth Leadership Training Program participants from

Madagascar. On his part, Professeur Doutremepuich paid a courtesy visit to us and he gave a short presentation

on the recent developments in the field of DNA.

Mr Mervyn Anthony, trainee at the ODPP, addresses the issue of disability rights and the challenges of disability

inclusion. We also pay tribute to late Sir Maurice Latour-Adrien, former Chief Justice and DPP, who passed away

on 31st July 2014. Lastly, we provide you with a summary of the latest Supreme Court judgments for the month of

August 2014.

We wish you a pleasant reading.

Zaynah Essop

State Counsel

Page 2

September 2014- Issue 40

Page 3

Appointment of Hon. Mr Iqbal Maghooa and Hon. Mrs Gaitree Jugessur-Manna as Puisne Judges

The Supreme Court of Mauritius has two more judges. They are former Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions Mr. Iqbal Maghooa and former Master and Registrar Mrs. Gaitree Jugessur-Manna. They took oath before the President of the Republic of Mauritius on 8th September 2014.

Hon. Justice Mohammud Iqbal Maghooa Honourable Mr Justice Mohammud Iqbal Maghooa studied LLB with Honours at the University of Mauritius. He came out first at the Bar Vocational Examination in 1991 and was awarded the Sir Raymond Hein Award. He was subsequently called to the Bar in Mauritius in October 1992 after completing his pupillage in England and France. Hon. Justice Maghooa joined the Attorney-General’s Office in 1993 where he served as State Counsel, Senior State Counsel, Principal State Counsel, Assistant Parliamentary Counsel and Assistant Solicitor-General before being appointed Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions. The newly appointed judge was also a part-time lecturer at the Faculty of Law and Management of the University of Mauritius on criminal and revenue laws. He was also involved, at regional level, with the COMESA and SADC particularly in the formulation of the Protocol for the setting up of a Customs Union, the Customs Management Regulations and the establishment of the COMESA Court of Justice and the SADC Tribunal. As former Deputy DPP, he mainly dealt with administrative issues and was head of the Fraud and Tax Unit.

Hon. Justice Gaitree Jugessur-Manna Honourable Gaitree Jugessur-Manna, former judge in Bankruptcy and Master& Registrar obtained her LLB with Honours in 1991 at the University of Mauritius. She was ranked 3rd in the Bar Vocational Exams on the same year and was awarded a scholarship to do pupillage in the UK and in France. Mrs Justice Jugessur-Manna joined the State Law Office on the same year as her new brother judge but served also as Ag. District Court Magistrate from 1994 to 1996. She then came back to the State Law Office where she was appointed Senior State Counsel, Principal State Counsel, Assistant Parliamentary Counsel and then Assistant Solicitor-General. In 2000, she worked as Chief Legal Adviser for the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) for six months before coming back to the State Law Office. Mrs Justice Jugessur-Manna was appointed Judge in Bankruptcy and Master& Registrar in 2012. At the State Law Office, she gave legal advice to different Ministries and Governmental Departments and Parastatal bodies. She appeared for the Government in civil cases and for the State on several occasions including murder trials before the Assizes.

September 2014- Issue 40

Page 4

DISABILITY RIGHTS TODAY: The challenges of disability inclusion

People with disabilities are among the most vulnerable individuals of our society and the majority of them are constantly exposed

to injustices. In line with the ambition of making Mauritius a regional legal hub it is important to enhance our brand image as a

“disability rights friendly state” with the required “Awareness Raising” to inspire creative change towards attitudes, policies,

campaign and legislations that will promote disability-inclusive development and disability rights enhancement to support the

fulfillment of the economic, social, cultural, sport, political and civil rights of persons with disabilities. At the Office of the Director

of Public Prosecutions we are proud to contribute to the raising of awareness to foster the development of a disability-inclusive

society as part of our ethical commitment to support the requirements regarding “justice for all”.

The way forward towards the global enhancement of disability rights and inclusion of disabled people was launched on 20th

December 1993 with the adoption of the Standard Rules on the Equalization of opportunities for disabled persons by the United

Nation General Assembly. These rules were not legally binding but constituted the basis for the development, enhancement and

implementation of disability-related policies and the enactment of statutes to set up and reinforce Disability Rights. These rules

therefore were the foundational blueprint to foster the development of strategic measures for the promotion of equalization of

opportunities for persons with disabilities that have finally led towards the development and adoption of the current United

Nation Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities which is binding on the state.

Disability rights are human rights and justice in relation to these rights must not only be done but it must be seen to be done. The

achievement of a disability friendly democratic state involves maximizing the efficiency of existing legislations with the required

amendments regarding the promotion, protection and enhancement of disability rights as well as the development and enactment

of new ones in line with our societal requirements. At this stage the Training and Employment of Disabled Persons Board

(TEDPB) Act as amended in 2012 has a major drawback that should be addressed. Part II of the schedule (Section 13) of the

Amendment Bill states that upon failure to comply with the requirements of this Act employers will have to pay a monthly fine of

MUR 4000 for each disabled person they failed to recruit. The fine payable for contravention at this stage should be reviewed to a

compelling amount with the required additional amendments in both the TEDPB Act 2012 and the Employment Rights Act 2013

in order to incite employers to abide to their responsibility to employ the required applicable quota of disabled persons at every

level within their organizations.

The decision making process regarding the enactment of legislations and policy making should involve the heavy participation of

Disabled Persons in order to maximize disability-empowerment ideas, leadership, creativity, innovation and commitment to reach

September 2014- Issue 40

Page 5

the most efficient decisions to support disability empowerment. According to section (O) of the preamble of the United Nation

Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD), “the State Parties to the Convention need to consider that

persons with disabilities have the opportunity to be actively involved in decision-making processes about policies and programs,

including those directly concerning them”.

Politics is at the heart of major decision making process regarding the state including the setting up of disability empowerment

policies and the enactment of disability friendly legislations as well as specific legislations for disability empowerment. In our

quest to become a reliable and business friendly legal hub in the region, it is the duty of the state to abide to the requirements of

the UNCRPD because the issue of Disability Rights is a question that will foster our pride and leadership in the region and

particularly in Africa. Mauritius has a leading role to play in Africa and our targeted status of legal hub will definitely reinforce

our leadership in the eyes of Africa and the world. As a democratic state we therefore need to ensure that the ongoing electoral

reform are disability inclusive with the inclusion of a specific and logic percentage for the proportional representation of persons

with disabilities in parliament.

According to official sources available from the United Nation, Mauritius has signed and ratified the United Nation Convention

on the Right of Persons with Disabilities but only signed the optional protocol which has not yet been ratified. Ratifying the

optional protocol is a key requirement of a democratic state that is targeting the status of legal hub. Change is the only thing that

is constant in a contemporary democracy and the global mindset on disability is and has been constantly evolving. Ratifying the

Optional Protocol is a key requirement for disability rights enhancement in Mauritius. It is therefore a matter of national pride

and leadership for Mauritius to lead by example with the ratification of the said protocol.

The issue of accessibility is another key issue that should be addressed by building promoters and building owners in Mauritius so

as to comply with the statutory requirement of section 3 (a) (ii) of the Building Control Act on accessibility which imply that the

needful should be done to ensure accessibility for person with impaired mobility and communication so that they are able to

access and use the building as well as the facilities within the building comfortably.

It is in the interest of Mauritius as a state to promote disability inclusive developments and disability rights enhancement as

highlighted above in order to strengthen our global brand image as a disability friendly state; thereby paving the way to achieve

our target as a business engine and a promising legal hub to attract investments for maximizing the creation of wealth in Africa.

Mervyn Anthony

September 2014- Issue 40

Page 6

ADN : L'analyse génétique des caractères morphologiques apparents

La visite du Professeur Doutremepuich du laboratoire de Bordeaux au bureau du DPP n'a pas laissé nos officiers

indifférents. En effet, cette sommité en matière d'ADN a tenu à s'adresser aux membres du bureau sur les progrès de la

recherche et les nouvelles formes d'analyses qui sont en ce moment même développées.

"Je dis souvent que nous ne sommes qu'à l'âge de pierre en ce qu'il s'agit de l'ADN. On commence maintenant et on a encore

tout à trouver", nous dit le Pr Doutremepuich. Les progrès sont toutefois remarquables. Une analyse d'ADN peut révéler

tant d'informations, tels que, la couleau de la peau, des cheveux ou des yeux. "Dans un futur proche, on pourra faire un

portrait robot du suspect avec le rapport d'analyse", explique le Professeur.

Les analyses peuvent identifier l'ADN dans des milieux hostiles. "Nous avons déjà trouvé de l'ADN sur une victime restée

dans l'eau et nous l'avons identifié. Le suspect habitait non loin du lieu", nous confie-t-il. Et d'ajouter que l'ADN résiste à

100 degrés. "On arrive à retrouver de l'ADN sur des allumettes ou des vêtements brulés", explique le Professeur.

Autre avancée importante: la rapidité des analyses et des résultats. Le Professeur Doutremepuich soutient qu'il peut traiter

un dossier en 24 heures ou 48 heures. Il précise toutefois que tout dépend de la complexité de l'analyse et de l'échantillon

prélevé. Selon lui, un dossier criminel doit être fait plus rapidement qu'un autre dossier.

L'expert met toutefois en garde contre les risques de contamination des échantillons d'ADN. Il explique que la

contamination peut être faite sur le lieu du prélèvement, durant le déplacement de l'échantillon ou même au laboratoire. Le

Professeur est pour plus de contrôle. "Il y a plusieurs contrôles au laboratoire. Nous faisons même des contrôles sur les

contrôles pour être sûr que tout va bien", explique le Pr Doutremepuich.

Ashley Victor

Public Relations Officer

September 2014- Issue 40

Page 7

Visit of the "Youth Leadership Training Program" participants at the ODPP

The Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions welcomed on 22nd of August 2014, a delegation of participants of the “Youth

Leadership Training Program” (YLTP) who were in Mauritius for a study tour.

The YLTP is a training program designed and implemented by the Office of the Madagascar Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung. It

consisted of:

• National Representative of FES Madagascar,

• The main trainer of YLTP,

• Assistant YLTP Program.

• Other young participants

These young contributors were professionals of 25-38 years, from different areas such as civil society, media, private sector,

political parties, public sector, amongst others. The goal of the program is to encourage the emergence of new generations of

Malagasy makers who are engaged in developing the required technicalities as well as a sense of ethics.

The main purpose of their visit at the Office of the DPP was to exchange information on the functioning and role of the Director

of Public Prosecutions as the main actor of good public governance in Mauritius. There was a presentation made by Mr Iqbal

Maghooa , then Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions together with Mr Denis Mootoo, Ag Assistant Director of Public

Prosecutions in which they enlightened the audience about the functions and powers of the DPP under the Constitution of

Mauritius. They also laid emphasis on the structure of the ODPP.

Yashvind Kumar Rawoah, Legal Research Officer

September 2014- Issue 40

Page 8

Advocacy Training by Mrs Maura McGowan QC

The Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) had the pleasure of welcoming Mrs Maura McGowan QC for a 4-day

workshop on Advocacy held at the Rajsoomer Lallah Lecture Hall from 18th August to 21st August 2014.

Mrs McGowan QC was called to the Bar at the Honourable Society of the Middle Temple in 1980. She is a criminal lawyer and is

equally experienced in corporate, tax, charity and mortgage fraud. Due to her notoriety, Mrs McGowan appeared in several

landmark cases such as R V Potts and Others: The largest ever SFO prosecution of a housing fraud namely a Ponzi scheme arising

out of Practical Property Portfolios in the North East. She has also appeared successfully in a number of infanticide trials. She

took silk in 2001 and was subsequently nominated Deputy High Court Judge in 2010. In the year 2013, the Bar Council elected her

as Chairman. Mrs McGowan QC was also named Director of Education and Training for the South Eastern Circuit and a serving

member of the Criminal Bar Association. She was also called to the Irish Bar.

Mrs McGowan gave invaluable advice on key issues such as Ethics and vulnerable witness. "You can't talk to a child as if you were

talking to an adult." Mrs McGowan stressed on the importance of ethics in the profession. She talked about vulnerable witnesses

and the fact that some barristers may bully them. She said that it is the role of the prosecution counsel to intervene whenever this

happens. In an adversarial system like ours, it is important to prepare the case thoroughly and anticipate any question for the

defence.

Securing a conviction

"How to secure a conviction? It's simply by proving each and every element of the case. And when you decide to prosecute

someone, you already know that you can win the case or else you would not have started it at the first place", she explained.

DNA

Mrs McGowan has also valued the importance of DNA. She said that accused parties were more inclined to plead guilty especially

in sexual offence cases when DNA was properly used. She said that jury was more likely to believe the scientific evidence that is

becoming more and more reliable.

September 2014- Issue 40

Page 9

Defence statements

To prevent "defence by ambush", Mrs McGowan suggested that the use of a defence statement might be fair for the prosecution.

Such defence statement would include the witnesses and expert witnesses they intend to call, how long they think the trial is

going to take, and including the summary of the defence case.’ The duty to disclose information is incumbent both to the

prosecution and to the defence as a matter of fairness.

Swindling and Embezzlement

Mrs McGowan was not the only one intervening during the training week. Mr Armoogum and Mrs Nathire-Beebeejaun talked

about Embezzlement and how to tackle some of the issues arising in these cases. Mr Rammaya and Ms Soochit eventually

discussed the different aspects of the offence of swindling in the law and how to draft information in these types of cases.

Intervention of Hon Eddy Balancy, Ag. CJ

The Acting Chief Justice Eddy Balancy addressed to the participants about the pitfalls of state counsel and attorneys before the

Supreme Court. He talked about appearances in chambers and appearances in first instance cases and application for judicial

review and appeals. He insisted that barristers and attorneys should always have a copy of the Judge in Chambers Rules 2002.

Honourable Justice Balancy also explained that following the visit of Sir Anthony Hooper, he has been working on a way to

implement case management policy in our Courts. A good case management would result to less delay before the court.

Ashley victor, Public Relations Officer & Toshan Rai Bundhun, Legal Research Officer

September 2014- Issue 40 Advocacy 2014 - Highlights

Page 10

September 2014- Issue 40

Page 11

Mauritian 2014 Chevening Scholars announced

The British High Commission in Mauritius recently announced that Vignesh Ellayah, State Counsel at the Office of the

Director of Public Prosecutions, has been selected for the prestigious Chevening Scholarship. The scholarship is awarded to

talented professionals who have demonstrated the potential to become future leaders across a wide range of fields. It is fully

funded by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and covers one year of post-graduate studies in a British university. He

will start his courses in the UK this September.

British High Commissioner Jonathan Drew said:

“The Chevening scholarship is a prestigious award and, since 1986, has benefitted many of the best and brightest talents in

Mauritius. They return to Mauritius with enhanced skills and are in an ideal position to put their expertise at the service of

Mauritius. I wish Vignesh a very fruitful experience in the UK.

Vignesh will study for an LLM in International Banking and Finance Law at University College London. He has been

working as State Counsel in the Office of the DPP since 2012. On receiving his award, he said:

“I feel deeply honoured to have been awarded the Chevening Scholarship for an LLM in International Banking and Finance

at the University College London. This scholarship gives me an invaluable opportunity and privilege to become part of the

prestigious Chevening network. Being a Chevening Scholar will allow me to broaden my global outlook, build a network of

like-minded professionals from all over the world and learn from the very best. It will undoubtedly be a life changing

experience for me, both personally and professionally.”

The other selected candidate was Mr Yamal Matabudul who will study for an MSC in Higher Education at the University of

Oxford.

Toshan Rai Bundhun, Legal Research Officer

September 2014- Issue 40

Page 12

Tribute to late Sir Maurice Latour-Adrien

Former Chief Justice and DPP

Sir Maurice Latour-Adrien departed this world at the age of 99 on the 31st July 2014. He was a role model for many and was

respected for his wisdom, humility and hard work. Sir Maurice was also a perfect gentleman according to his

contemporaries. He was also known as being pious and for his spiritualism. In fact, he spent a lot of time praying at the

Mont Carmel monastery.

The Supreme Court decided to pay tribute to the former Chief Justice on the 3rd September 2014. The Attorney General, the

Director of Public Prosecutions and the judges and members of the bar and the law society were present at the ceremony.

Although few of the lawyers present appeared before him, Sir Maurice has made an important contribution to the

Mauritian jurisprudence. One of his famous decisions is in the case of Regina v Siatous [1974 MR 100] where he stated in

appeal that the co-existence of provocation and premeditation is possible.

Sir Maurice was also the first Director of Public Prosecutions of Mauritius following the constitutional changes of 1964

where the Attorney General became a political appointee and the office started to operate like a Ministry. The supervising

officer of the Attorney General's Office was at the time the DPP and later the Solicitor General.

Sir Maurice was a brilliant Magistrate and rapidly joined the Crown Law Office. He was appointed judge in 1966. He rose

rapidly and became Chief Justice in 1970. He held office for seven years and improved the premises of the Supreme Court

with the assistance of the then French Government.

After his retirement, Sir Maurice acted as legal adviser to the Mauritius Commercial Bank and was on the Board of

Directors from 1980 to 2002 and was also chairman of the Mauritius Union Assurance Co. Ltd.

SUMMARY OF SUPREME COURT JUDGMENTS – August 2014

September 2014- Issue 40

Page 13

Ally J. M. E. v The State of Mauritius [2014 SCJ 283]

Chui Yew Cheong J & Teelock J.

Duty on magistrate – Pronounce conviction before sentence

The Appellant was prosecuted before the district court under 3

counts of an information as follows: (a) failing to provide

specimen of his breath for a breath test; (b) failing to provide a

specimen or blood or urine for laboratory test; and (c) driving

with a proportion of alcohol in his blood which exceeded the

prescribed limit. The Appellant initially pleaded not guilty but

he then changed his plea. The information was read over to

him anew and he pleaded guilty. However the learned

magistrate did not record whether he had pleaded guilty to all

3 counts. After having explained to the Appellant his rights,

the learned magistrate proceeded straight away to sentencing

him without pronouncing sentence.

At the appeal, the court held that ‘it is now settled law that

pursuant to section 72(2), a conviction is a condition precedent

to the sentence and where the Court omits to convict and

proceeds to sentence, the sentence will be quashed. (See Callee

v. The Queen [1970 MR 97]). Since the decision in Callee, this

Court has held in a number of cases of the requirement

imposed by section 72(2) to convict before proceeding to

sentence. (See The Director of Public Prosecutions v. The

District Magistrate of Black River and Ors [1972 MR 217],

Rajabally v. The Queen [1982 MR 122], Desvaux de Marigny v.

The Queen [1982 MR 182]).’

The Appellate Court further held that, in the interests of

justice, a retrial ought to be re-ordered under section 96(5) of

the District and Intermediate Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction)

Act. Accordingly, the appeal was allowed, the sentence was

quashed and the case was remitted to the lower court for a

retrial.

Mautadin v The State [2014 SCJ 300]

Hamuth J & Teelock J.

Additional grounds of appeal outside delay

The Appellant was prosecuted before the district court for the

offence of driving an autocyle on a road with the proportion of

alcohol exceeding the prescribed limit. He pleaded not guilty

and he was represented by counsel. He was sentenced to pay a

fine of Rs 20,000, to undergo 6 months’ imprisonment, ordered

to pay Rs 100 as costs, he was further disqualified in relation to

all types of vehicles for a period of 8 months and his driving

licence was cancelled and endorsed.

He appealed against conviction only. He had initially appealed

against sentence only. Subsequently he filed 3 additional

grounds of appeal. However, before the day of the hearing,

counsel for the Appellant indicated in her skeleton argument

that she was not insisting on the first initial ground as well as

the first two initial grounds so that she would argue only the

third additional ground.

The respondent, after giving notice, has raised a preliminary

objection to the effect that the appeal should be set aside

because it was not prosecuted within the statutory delay as

prescribed by Section 93 (3) of the District and Intermediate

Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act (The Act).

The Appellate Court stated that it is possible for an appellant

who is out of time to apply for leave to appeal outside the

statutory delay by following the appropriate procedure, namely

by making a written motion with supporting affidavit evidence

setting out the grounds on which he purports to rely to seek

leave. It is well settled that the Court has a discretion which is

exercised in exceptional circumstances, to grant such a motion

and allow the applicant (appellant) to proceed with an appeal

not prosecuted timeously (vide also Curpen v State [2008 SCJ

September 2014- Issue 40

Page 14

305], Hanumanthadu v The State & Anor [2010 MR 365]).

In the present case, the Appellate Court was not in presence of

any such application for leave. In a proper case, even on the day

of the hearing of the appeal, the Court may exceptionally

entertain a verbal motion for leave. There was no such motion

either.

For reasons mentioned in the judgment, the ground of appeal

raised was not arguable so as to warrant the exercise of the

Appellate Court’s discretion in allowing the Appellant to proceed

with the argument outside delay.

The appeal was dismissed.

Judicial Committee of The Privy Council

Beezadhur v The Independent Commission against Corruption

(ICAC) and another

Lady Hale; Lord Kerr; Lord Reed; Lord Carnwath & Lord Hodge

JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY Lord Carnwath

FIAMLA-Exempt transaction-Burden of proof

This is an appeal against the judgment of the Supreme Court of

Mauritius, dismissing the appellant’s appeal against conviction

and sentence for offences contrary to Sections 5(1) and 8 of the

Financial and Anti-Money Laundering Act (‘the 2002 Act”).

Leave was granted. The two issues which was raised on appeal

was as follows: (i) On which party does the onus of proof lie

regarding the application of exemptions under section 5(2) of the

Act? & (ii) What is meant by the words “lawful business

activities” in the definition of “exempt transaction” in section 2 of

that Act?

On the first issue, it was held that the Supreme Court was right to

decide that, in accordance with section 10(11)(a) of the

Constitution, it was for the defendant to show that the

transaction was within one of the exempt categories.

To this effect, reliance was made on the cases of Police v

Moorbannoo [1972] MR 22, Police v Fra [1975] MR 157 and

Abongo v The State [2009] SCJ 1981. It was pointed out that

‘exclusivity of knowledge’ is not an essential requirement for the

application of the exception. Refering to R v Johnstone [2003] 1

WLR 1976, the following extract was quoted:

“[…] the extent to which the burden on the accused

relates to facts which, it exists, are readily provable by

him as matters within his own knowledge or to which

he has ready accessed.”

The board was of the view that the structure and content of the

statutory offence and of specific exemptions were designed to

bring into play the Edwards principles (R v Edwards 1975).

Addressing the second issue, with regards to the definition of

(lawful business activities), the board considered that a

generous approach should be taken to the availability of the

exemption under section 5(2) of the FIAMLA. The argument

put forward was based on the notion of “ strict and liberal

construction” (Bennion on statutory interpretation 5th Edn

2008) and the case of Selassie v The Queen [2013 UKPC 29]. It

was held that business can be read as meaning occupation,

profession or trade. Activities can be regarded as the

transactions involved in carrying out one’s occupation.

Although this might not be the conventional connotation, the

board was agreeable to the fact that it should be adopted.

Referring to the Oxford English Dictionary, the board was of

the view that “business activities” and “business” can both be

interpreted as in involving a commercial activity. Therefore, a

broader sense was given to the activity in which the appellant

was engaged.

The appeal was dismissed with respect to the first issue and

allowed with regards to the second one.