R v Mailos (Criminal Review Case 1 of 1934) [1934] ZMHCNR 2 (31 December 1934)

74 Vol. I] R. v. MAILOS. A Crim in al R e v ie w Case of 1934. Regulation 12 of the Mining Regulations under the M ining Proclamation, 1912 (Cap. 73)—unauthorised person entering mine property— moaning of the term “ unauthorised person ” . Regulation 12 of the Mining Regulations under the Mining Proclamation, 1912 (Cap. 73) reads: “ No unauthorised person shall enter into any part o f a mining property whether surface or underground.” The Mining Ordinance enacted as the Mining Proclamation, 1912, was repealed and replaced by the Mining Ordinance (Cap. 91) in 1958. Regulation 1907 o f the Mining Regulations made under the new Ordinance reads thus: “ No unauthorised person shall enter any part o f the mining property in the immediate vicinity of, or within a fence enclosing, any shaft or other mine working or any plant or machinery.” See also R. v. J. B. Metcalfe Walton 2 N . R. L. R. 207. Fitzgerald, A. J.: The term “ unauthorised person ” means a person without lawful excuse. A lawful excuse need not necessarily be a signed authority, it could be an authority by implication, invitation, custom, etc. In each case it is for the magistrate to decide whether the circum­ stances alleged by the defence constitute a lawful excuse.