Judge Said Man Faced Over One Million Dollars In Penalties For Keeping Vehicles In Disrepair On Land
By Alric Lindsay
Glenroy Manning appeared before Magistrate Gunn in the Summary Court today, February 17, 2025, to be sentenced for failling to comply with a land notice. In particular, he failed to remove vehicles in disrepair on his property. Manning faced a penalty of $5,000 per day for a period of 206 days, amounting to $1,030,000.
The offence
According to counsel from the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, Manning breached section 29A of the Development and Planning Act. This states:
29A.(1) If it appears to the Authority that the amenity of an area is adversely affected or
seriously injured by reason of the ruinous, dilapidated or other condition of any
building, structure, fence or wall, or by the condition of land due to the deposit
of refuse, spoil or derelict vehicles or equipment, or the occupation of land or a
road for purposes of the repair of vehicles or equipment, it may serve a notice
under this section on —
(a) the owner or occupier of the land or building; or
(b) the person responsible for causing the condition of the land or building.(2) The notice shall require such steps for remedying the condition of the land or building as may be specified in the notice to be taken within such period as may be so specified.
(3) Subject to the following provisions of this Part, the notice shall take effect at the end of such period as may be specified in the notice
Regarding the penalty payable, the Act states:
Penalty for non-compliance with notice under section 29A
29B.(1) The provisions of this section shall have effect where a notice has been served
under section 29A.(2) If any owner or occupier of the land or building on whom the notice was served
fails to take steps required by the notice within the period specified in it for
compliance with it, that owner or occupier commits an offence and is liable on
summary conviction to a fine of —
(a) five thousand dollars per day from the date that the notice takes effect in
accordance with section 29A(3) in relation to land or a building in a zone
other than a Hotel/Tourism zone or a Commercial zone as defined in the
Development and Planning Regulations (2021 Revision); or
(b) twenty-five thousand dollars per day from the date that the notice takes
effect in accordance with section 29A(3) in relation to land or a building in a Hotel/Tourism zone or a Commercial zone as so defined, and, in default of the payment of the fine, to imprisonment for a term of six
months.
DPP counsel explained that a complainant took photos of vehicles in disrepair on Manning’s property, which were then sent to the Central Planning Authority.
On March 27, 2024, approval was granted for a notice to be issued to Manning to cease the repair of vehicles on his property and return the land to its proper condition.
On April 17, 2024, the notice was sent by registered mail.
In June 2024, a compliance officer visited the property and found it in the same condition.
Sentencing
According to DPP counsel, 206 days lapsed between the expiry of the land notice and Manning’s guilty plea. He was therefore liable to pay of $5,000 per day for that period.
Arguing on his behalf, attorney Dennis Brady noted that Manning rented the property to a tenant. The tenant brought vehicles to the property to repair.
Reportedly, Manning informed the tenant that he could not bring vehicles to the property. Eventually, the tenant went home on rollover and left the vehicles in disrepair on Manning’s property.
After hearing from DPP counsel and defence counsel, Magistrate Gunn acknowledged that Manning had low culpability since he didn’t cause the violation. Instead, it was his tenant.
However, Magistrate Gunn noted that Manning initially failed to remove the vehicles in disrepair.
In the circumstances, Magistrate Gunn ordered a smaller daily fine, amounting to a total of $5,150 over 206 days. Failure to pay the fine will result in six months imprisonment. In addition, Manning was ordered ro pay $400 in costs.
Manning has seven days to appeal the ruling.
