Finally we quote from Wade & Forsyth on Administrative Law (7th edn) p.25:-

"An essential part of the rule of law, accordingly, is a system of rules for preventing the abuse of discretionary power".

We recognise that this development in England and elsewhere has in substance occurred since this court took over the jurisdiction of the Cour des Jugements et Records. However, the exercise of the powers of the Court of Appeal, although equated by the Appeal Law of 1961 to the Cour des Jugements et Records, cannot be taken to be limited to the state of the law as it stood prior to 1964, the year when that Law came into effect; the law must be free to develop both in the Royal Court and in this Court in order to take into account changing circumstances and perceptions. It was not intended to be a museum piece. A recent example of a decision of this Court in which there has been such a development wasMorton -v- Paint (1996) 21 GLJ 36, in which the need for the development of the law governing occupiers liability was held by this Court to match a judicial process which would be likely to have taken place over the years in the Courts in England had it not been for the passing of the Occupiers Liability Act 1957, a statute which had not been extended to Guernsey.

Submissions on Extra-territoriality

During the hearing of these applications on 15th September 1998 Advocate Barnes with some diffidence raised the possibility of an argument additional to those already placed before the Court in writing and by way of oral submission. It was clearly a point of potential public importance, if tenable. Mr Barnes was given 7 days in which to notify the Court as to whether he wished to take this argument, and he did so notify the Greffier in the time required. A timetable had been set out by the Court which was to be followed in this eventuality, and the Court has received two sets of submissions in writing from Mr Barnes and a submission in writing from H.M. Procureur.