10 Sept 2021
The ground of appeal raised a question of law alone concerning the correctness of the judge's directions and whether they impinged the applicant's right of silence; accordingly leave to appeal was not required and the applicant may appeal as of right under section 82(2)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance.
18 Dec 2007
The judge's repeated remonstration that the immunised witness had 'lied' and that her immunity might be 'torn up', expressed in colloquial terms a lay witness could reasonably understand as meaning she must adhere to her prior police statement to avoid losing immunity; that created a material irregularity because it could have induced tailored testimony affecting the jury's assessment of key incriminating evidence; the court could not safely apply the proviso, therefore leave to appeal was granted and the conviction quashed, with a hearing to determine retrial.
8 Nov 1989
The Court held the trial judge properly evaluated and directed himself on the risks of identification evidence, was entitled to accept the victim's identification given the circumstances and familiarity, and therefore the conviction was safe; leave to appeal was refused.
9 Feb 1983
Because the trial judge's directions about the photographic evidence of wire were ambiguous on a matter that substantially affected the credibility of the tying-up evidence, the jury may have been misled and the convictions were unsafe; appeals allowed and convictions set aside.
29 Feb 1972
The convictions were upheld because identification evidence together with the appellant's cautioned statements and other evidence supplied a sufficient factual basis for the jury to convict for robbery and, alternatively, for murder based on common intention; the trial judge's directions were adequate and there was no obligation to leave manslaughter given the defence put and forensic evidence.