18 Jan 2019
The court granted leave to appeal because the posed question of law regarding the requisite mens rea for a conspiracy to traffic in a dangerous drug (whether knowledge of the specific drug named in the indictment is required) is of sufficient importance to be determined by the Court of Final Appeal.
1 Apr 2003
The Court refused leave because the trial judge reasonably and properly inferred trafficking from the overwhelming quantity and value of drugs, their storage away from the applicant's home, and the evidence of possession; the inference was the only reasonable one and did not depend on any improper revival of statutory presumptions.
26 May 2000
1st Applicant: Convictions quashed and sentence set aside because the offences were summary offences that could not be validly tried in the District Court. 2nd Applicant: Appeal dismissed because the trial judge lawfully found the admissions and notebook entry voluntary and admissible and there was overwhelming evidence to infer possession and knowledge; convictions are safe.
8 Oct 1980
Appeal allowed and conviction quashed because the magistrate's misdirections rendered the conviction unsafe; key evidence did not show drugs in the syringe and the s48 presumptions could have been rebutted, therefore a retrial was refused.
16 Aug 1977
The trial judge materially misdirected the jury by treating the whole flat as the 'premises' for the purpose of the presumption in s.45; the presumption must be confined to the self-contained part where the incriminating equipment was found (the locked room) and therefore the conviction could not stand. The appeal was allowed on that ground; the Crown had not shown that the jury would inevitably have convicted on other evidence outside the locked room.