17 Mar 1983
THE QUEEN v. WONG TAK-LAM AND OTHERS
- Citation
- THE QUEEN v. WONG TAK-LAM AND OTHERS
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Case number
- CACC1120/1981
The conviction of the 1st appellant (D1) was quashed because the trial judge materially misdirected on facts and law (including improper reliance on the guilty pleas of co-accused and other factual errors) such that the misdirections were significant and might have misled the judge into convicting; the proviso could not be applied because the court could not be satisfied the conviction would inevitably have been reached absent the errors. A new trial for D1 was ordered in the interests of justice (with Crown undertaking not to call evidence about D2 and D4). By contrast, the convictions of D3…