DOMINGO V. THE QUEEN

• Pages: 61-68

DOMINGO V. THE QUEEN



61

Appeal dismissed.

5



DOMINGO V. THE QUEEN

ALBERT OMOWALE DOMINGO

10



V

THE QUEEN

FEDERAL SUPREME COURT.

BRETT,



F.J.

15



TAYLOR,



F.J.

BAIRAMIAN,



F.J.

15th February, 1963.

APPELLANT

RESPONDENT

SUIT NO.FSC 206/1962

Criminal Law- Stealing - Forgery - Criminal Procedure Act, ss.152(1) and (2),

20





s.154(1) and Third Schedule Form 23 - Criminal Code, ss. 464, 465 - Criminal

Law and Procedure - Count of stealing goods over a period - More thefts

than one - Goods not specified - Suggested test on precision of count -

Forgery - Allegation of intent in Count unnecessary - Forgery - Falsity of

document - Intent in making it.

25

Commercial Law- Registration of Business Names - Application which is not

genuine - Duty of Registrar.

ISSUES:

30





1. Whether a count accusing a person of stealing unspecified goods worth a

certain amount over a certain period is properly drafted.

2.

Whether the Registrar of Business Names has a duty to inquire into the

genuineness of the particulars in an application before him.

3.

Whether merely assuming and signing a fictitious name without any intention to

35





defraud thereby, though the transaction is fraudulent in other respects, is

forgery.

FACTS:

The appellant was assistant and later manager of the W.N. Printing Corpora-

tion which traded in books and stationery. He bought these on credit and sold to

40





others. to conceal his misdoings he used business names, in registering two of

them he wrote and signed two fictitious names. Appellant also opened an account

at a bank in a business name. The first count accused the appellant of stealing

over a certain period unspecified goods worth a certain amount. Count 8 alleged

that he made a false document by filling and signing in the application form the

45





name of a non-existent person with intent to induce the Registrar of Business Names

to register a business name. Those allegations showed the form to be a false do-

cument within s.464(c) of the Criminal Code and that the making of it with the said

intent was a forgery within s.464. Count 9 was on similar lines. He was also

charged with operating the Bank account under fictitious names and signatures.

50





It was argued for the appellant that the Registrar of Business Names had no duty

to inquire into the genuineness of the particulars in the application, his duty being

merely to register the business name; and that merely assuming and signing a fic-

titious name, without any intention to defraud thereby, although the transaction

might be fraudulent in other respects, was not forgery.