Counsel for the respondent submits that delivery to the board's office of the request to state a case, and acceptance of that delivery by the acting chairman, is not sufficient. He submits that the request must be served on each member of the board, relying on the requirements of the Summary Convictions Act and on cases such as Westmore v. Paine, [1891] 1 Q.B. 482, and authorities referred to therein. Insofar as the provision of the Summary Convictions Act requiring "service" is concerned, and insofar as "service" and "delivery" may be two different things, this point is already taken care of by the finding that the Summary Convictions Act provision cannot be made to supersede the Assessment Act provision, so the question is: is delivery as made and accepted by the acting chairman good delivery to the board as required by s. 67(2)(a) of the Act, set out above?
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.