Licence determination and cessation date are final; continued operation and renewal cannot be claimed after a conclusive Supreme Court order.

Once the Supreme Court had treated the earlier dispute over determination of the distillery licence as concluded and fixed a final date for cessation of manufacture, the distillery could not seek renewal or continued operation beyond that date. The High Court's interim stay of dispossession and permission to continue in possession were inconsistent with that conclusive order and were set aside. Disposal of remaining stock, apparatus, storage vessels and distilling plant was required to proceed under the applicable distillery rule and the directions of the Financial Commissioner after revocation, cancellation or determination of the licence.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court could grant stay of dispossession and permit renewal of the distillery licence after the Supreme Court had earlier dismissed the appeals and directed cessation of manufacture after 6 September 1976.

Analysis: The earlier order of the Supreme Court was treated as conclusive on the dispute concerning the validity of the notice determining the licence and it was made clear that no pronouncement had been made on the validity of any licence. Once the appeals had been dismissed on merits and the parties had accepted cessation of manufacture after the stated date, it was not open to the distillery to seek renewal of the licence beyond that date. The High Court's interim protection permitting continued possession was therefore inconsistent with the earlier conclusive order. As regards removal of stock and plant, the governing rule directed disposal in accordance with directions of the Financial Commissioner when a licence stood revoked, cancelled or determined.

Conclusion: The stay of dispossession granted by the High Court was set aside, and directions were to be issued under the applicable distillery rule for disposal of the stock, apparatus, storage vessels and distilling plant.

Final Conclusion: The appellant State succeeded in securing reversal of the High Court's interim order, while the question of contempt was left undecided and the matter of disposal of remaining distillery assets was directed to be regulated administratively.

Ratio Decidendi: A party cannot seek renewal or continued operation under a licence after a prior conclusive order has determined the dispute and fixed a final date for cessation; ancillary disposal of stock and plant must then follow the governing statutory or regulatory directions.

---