31 May 2012
The applicant failed to discharge the burden of proving that his 2006 notice of abandonment was not a deliberate and informed act; his explanations were not credible and therefore the abandonment was not a nullity, so the application to revive leave to appeal was refused.
5 Nov 2004
The applications for leave were dismissed because there was no reasonably arguable point of law of great and general importance and it was not reasonably arguable that any act or omission in the courts below caused a substantial or grave injustice in relation to conviction or sentence.
20 Feb 1997
On the facts as found by the trial judge — including the back‑dating and instruction to delay presentation of the cheque, its dishonour and stoppage, disappearance of the goods and a false company address — the applicant was proved to have acted dishonestly to induce delivery of the goods beyond reasonable doubt; the trial judge was properly directed on the law and the conviction is upheld.
24 Apr 1991
The appeal was allowed because the magistrate erred by making unsupported judicial‑notice assumptions about the premises and local drug trade which improperly discredited the appellant's account; consequently the conviction for trafficking was quashed and a conviction for simple possession was substituted with an appropriate sentence.