Republic v Akimu
As mentioned above, officials of the National Parks and Wildlife Department disguised themselves as potential customers of the defendant, who was in possession of large amounts of ivory with the intention for sale.
Database of Wildlife Related Law
As mentioned above, officials of the National Parks and Wildlife Department disguised themselves as potential customers of the defendant, who was in possession of large amounts of ivory with the intention for sale.
The Honduran Curly hair tarantula is a species protected under CITES and Council Regulation (EC) No 338/97 on theprotection of wild fauna and flora (“the EC Regulation”). This European Court of Justice (ECJ) case concerns the interpretation of Article 8(5) of the EC Regulation.
This case involved a string of litigation concerning an application for an injunction and declaration to restrain Japanese whaling in the Australian Whale Sanctuary adjacent to Antarctica. The case was brought by conservation group, the Human Society International (HSI), against the Japanese company, Kyodo Senpaku Kaisha Ltd.
Mr. Tridon operates a centre for the artificial incubation of parrot eggs in Champagnier. He is accused in the main proceedings of having transferred for consideration captive born and bred specimens of species of macaw whose use for commercial purposes is prohibited throughout national territory by the Guyane decree.
The prosecutor indicted Mr. Nilsson for:
The applicant sought bail pleading exceptional circumstances: his severe medical condition; he was elderly (51 years) and that he was a first-time offender.
This is an appeal case based on arguments that the sentence of imprisonment is excessive when the magistrate could have imposed a fine and that the order for forfeiture was wrong.
The court held that, the fine imposed was the maximum according to section 110 (b) of the Act which provides for penalties. The court held that, there is no explanation why the magistrate imposed the maximum fine for an accused who pleaded guilty and was a first offender.
This was an appeal on the decision of the Chief Magistrate that found the appellant guilty of possession of four pieces of raw ivory and two hippo teeth without a permit or licence.