THE QUEEN v. KWOK MEI-SHEUNG AND OTHERS

THE QUEEN v. KWOK MEI-SHEUNG AND OTHERS

The court held that the presumption of regularity applies where a document and the conduct of the issuer indicate statutory authority; the reference in the authorization to s23(1) and the issuer's apparent office activated a rebuttable presumption that the authorization was issued by an officer of or above...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
THE QUEEN v. KWOK MEI-SHEUNG AND OTHERS
Parties
Appellants: KWOK Mei-sheung and 33 others; Respondent: The Queen
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
18 April 1989
Case Number
HCMA1278/1988
Procedural Posture
Magistracy Appeal to High Court (criminal) / Hearing on Reserved Point of Law Under S118(1)(d) Magistrates Ordinance
Outcome
Appeal dismissed on the referred point; convictions upheld
Legal Topics
Presumption of Regularity, Search/authorization Documents, Gambling Ordinance S23 Compliance, Statutory Presumptions Under S19(1)(c)
Source Language
en
Evidence Criminal Law Regulatory/gambling Law Presumption of Regularity Search/authorization Documents Gambling Ordinance S23 Compliance Statutory Presumptions Under S19(1)(c)

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

KWOK Mei-sheung and 33 others

Appellants

The Queen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Magistracy Appeal to High Court (criminal) / Hearing on Reserved Point of Law Under S118(1)(d) Magistrates Ordinance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a gambling authorization complied with s23(1) when the issuer's rank was not stated on the form
  2. 2 Whether the common law presumption of regularity (omnia praesumuntur rite esse acta) applies to certify the issuer held requisite rank
  3. 3 Whether the prosecution may rely on that presumption to activate presumptions under Gambling Ordinance s19(1)(c) which are material to proving the offences

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the presumption of regularity applies where a document and the conduct of the issuer indicate statutory authority; the reference in the authorization to s23(1) and the issuer's apparent office activated a rebuttable presumption that the authorization was issued by an officer of or above Superintendent rank, thereby permitting the statutory presumptions under s19(1)(c) to operate and supporting the convictions.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed on the referred point; convictions upheld

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed on the referred point; convictions upheld