9 Nov 2005
The magistrate's acceptance of the prosecution witness and rejection of the appellant and her witnesses was within his assessment of credibility; no good reason was shown to disturb those findings on appeal, therefore the conviction under ss.139 and 150 Cap.132 is upheld and the appeal is dismissed.
13 Dec 1995
Appeal allowed because there was no evidence that the officer had the written authorisation required by s.86 PHMSO Cap.132; absence of such proof meant the officer was not shown to be acting in execution of his duty and the convictions for obstruction and related criminal intimidation could not stand.
20 Dec 1988
The Magistrate was correct to find no case to answer because (1) the Crown conceded Urban Services officers were not persons authorised under s17C(2)(c) Immigration Ordinance; and (2) s23(1)(a) PHMSO only authorises requiring a suspect's correct name and address and production of evidence to that effect, not an unconditional power to demand an identity card; failure to produce an identity card alone does not constitute obstruction unless the identity card is the only evidence available of name and address.