Blagdon v HMTQ
William Blagdon appealed a conviction and the sentence he received in the Provincial Court for breaching section 91(3)(a) of the Atlantic Fishery Regulations, contrary to section 78(a) of the Fisheries Act.
Database of Wildlife Related Law
William Blagdon appealed a conviction and the sentence he received in the Provincial Court for breaching section 91(3)(a) of the Atlantic Fishery Regulations, contrary to section 78(a) of the Fisheries Act.
This is an appeal by the appellant against his conviction and sentence by the Regional Court magistrate, Upington, on charges of contravention of sections 44(1)(b)(i) and 46 of the Nature and Environmental Conservation Ordinance 19 of 1974.
The court held that in this matter, it was common cause that a South African Court had jurisdiction to decide ownership of the Sable based on the cession agreement. The court found that the cession agreement had been signed by the attorney, acting under the authority of the first respondent.
The appellant was found guilty in the Upington Magistrate’s Court, and appealed his conviction and sentence to the Northern Cape High Court where the conviction and sentence on the first count was set aside, and the conviction on the second count confirmed but the sentence was amended.