Wakilii

Rex v Abdulhussein (Criminal Appeal (Case Stated) No. 153 of 1942)

East African Court of Appeal · [1942] EACA 78 · 1942 Appeal Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Criminal appeal by way of case stated from acquittal by First Class Subordinate Court, Mombasa
Decision
Acquittal set aside and matter remitted to Subordinate Court for determination according to law

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

The Court held that Regulation 19(1)(c) empowering the Price Controller to require traders to furnish any information relating to their trade or business is not limited by Regulation 6(1), which mandates record-keeping from 1 July 1942. The Controller may lawfully require information covering periods before the commencement of the mandatory record-keeping requirement. The words in Regulation 19(1)(c) are wide and unambiguous, and the Court will not restrict their meaning by reference to another regulation.

Outcome

Acquittal set aside and matter remitted to Subordinate Court for determination according to law

Facts

The respondent, a large-scale trader in piece goods, was charged with refusing to furnish information to the Price Controller. The Controller, exercising powers under Regulation 19(1)(c) of the Defence (Control of Prices) Regulations 1942, required the respondent to provide details of all transactions in grey unbleached cotton piece goods from 1 January 1941 to 20 July 1942. The respondent provided information only for the period 1 July 1942 to 20 July 1942, arguing that he was not legally required to keep books showing the requested information before the Regulations came into force on 1 July 1942. The Subordinate Court accepted this defence and acquitted the respondent, holding that the Controller's power to demand information was limited to transactions after 1 July 1942 by virtue of Regulation 6(1), which mandated record-keeping from that date. The Attorney General appealed by way of case stated.

Issues

  1. Whether the words 'any information in relation to his trade or business' in Regulation 19(1)(c) of the Defence (Control of Prices) Regulations 1942 are limited by Regulation 6(1) of the same Regulations.

Orders

  • Order of acquittal set aside.
  • Case remitted to the Subordinate Court with a direction to hear and determine the complaint according to law.

Rules and key headnotes

Administrative Law — Regulatory Powers — Information Gathering — Scope of Controller's Powers
The power of a Price Controller under Regulation 19(1)(c) to require traders to furnish any information in relation to their trade or business is not limited by a separate regulation mandating record-keeping from a specified date.
Statutory Interpretation — Construction of Regulations — Wide Powers — No Implied Limitation
Where empowering words in a regulation are wide and unambiguous, courts will not restrict their meaning or application by reference to another regulation in the absence of ambiguity.
Administrative Law — Price Control — Information Requirements — Retrospective Application
A regulatory authority empowered to require information relating to a trader's business may lawfully demand information covering periods before the commencement of mandatory record-keeping requirements, provided the information relates to the trader's business.

Legislation cited (3)

  • Defence (Control of Prices) Regulations 1942 Regulation 19(1)(c)
  • Defence (Control of Prices) Regulations 1942 Regulation 6(1)
  • Defence (Control of Prices) Regulations 1942 Regulation 7

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Rex v Abdulhussein (Criminal Appeal (Case Stated) No. 153 of 1942) [1942] EACA 78 (1 January 1942)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.