THE QUEEN v. HO SIU KEUNG

THE QUEEN v. HO SIU KEUNG

There is no statutory right to a final address at the close of evidence in a magistrates' court; the magistrate's concise statement that the defence explanation was not convincing sufficed to show the presumption under s.19 was not rebutted, so the conviction was properly upheld.

Citation
THE QUEEN v. HO SIU KEUNG
Parties
Prosecution: THE QUEEN; Appellant/defendant: HO SIU-KEUNG
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
11 November 1986
Case Number
HCMA1070/1986
Procedural Posture
Magistracy Appeal (criminal) / Judgment on Appeal to the Supreme Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; conviction upheld.
Legal Topics
Presumption Under Gambling Ordinance S.19, Rebuttal of Presumption, Right to Address Magistrate, Sufficiency of Reasons, Unsafe Conviction
Source Language
EN

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

THE QUEEN

Prosecution

HO SIU-KEUNG

Appellant/defendant

Procedural Posture

Magistracy Appeal (criminal) / Judgment on Appeal to the Supreme Court

  1. 1 Whether the presumption under s.19 of the Gambling Ordinance was properly rebutted
  2. 2 Whether a defendant has a statutory right to address the magistrate at the close of the evidence
  3. 3 Whether absence of extensive reasons or of a final speech rendered the conviction unsafe

Ratio Decidendi

There is no statutory right to a final address at the close of evidence in a magistrates' court; the magistrate's concise statement that the defence explanation was not convincing sufficed to show the presumption under s.19 was not rebutted, so the conviction was properly upheld.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; conviction upheld.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.