View report page

133
Report of the Medical Officer of Health.
if a notice had been given with regard to the particular occupier of the
particular house that the refuse should be placed on a given spot, the
magistrate could override the discretion of the local authority. The
case before them raised no such point. The local authority had
thought fit to give a notice that in a particular area occupiers should
put their refuse upon the kerb-stone. They had not prescribed a conveniently
accessible position on the premises. Even assuming that
the local authority might prescribe with regard to particular premises
—he did not decide that they could—and that the magistrate could
not go beyond that, that was not what had happened in the case before
them. There had been a notice given beyond that contemplated by
by-law—namely, a notice that in a given area everyone should place
his refuse on the kerb-stone. He sympathised with the desire of the
local authority to have frequent removals of the house refuse in their
district, but they had to consider the rights of the occupiers in the
district. An obligation to remove the house refuse rested upon the
local authority. Occupiers could be required to facilitate such
removal, and owners might be called upon to spend money in making
that removal easy and convenient, as, for instance, by providing
movable dust-bins; but the question was: Could a local authority give
a notice applying a by-law in such a way as to relieve themselves of
their obligation to remove the refuse when the occupier was willing to
do everything which, apart from the particular notice, he could be
called upon to do ? The respondent was willing to place the dust-bin
in a conveniently accessible position on his premises. The local
authority said they would not remove the refuse unless it was
brought out to the kerb-stone. That was not a proper prescription
of a conveniently accessible position as contemplated by the by-law.
If there was no prescription with respect to particular premises
then the obligation on the occupier was to put the refuse in a
conveniently accessible position on the premises. He thought the
magistrate was right in holding that the appellants had failed without
reasonable cause to discharge the duty cast upon them by the Act, as
the respondent was willing to put the refuse in a place from which
they could conveniently remove it. The conviction was therefore
right, and the appeal would be dismissed."
Mr. Justice Ridley and Mr. Justice Darling concurred.