23 Mar 2015
HKSAR v. LEIGHTON CONTRACTORS (ASIA) LTD
- Citation
- HKSAR v. LEIGHTON CONTRACTORS (ASIA) LTD
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCMA604/2014
Appeal allowed and conviction set aside because the prosecution failed to prove that the goggles were 'approved' eye protectors, an essential element of the offence, and the magistrate's inference that the goggles must therefore have been approved was not logically compelled given available contrary inferences.
- Factories and industrial undertakings (protection of eyes) regulations
- Personal protective equipment
- Onus of proof
- Inferential reasoning in criminal cases