8 May 2007
The Court held the starting point and overall sentence were not manifestly excessive; the two-month discount for assistance fell within judicial discretion given the facts, applicant's conduct and record justified the sentence, and no error of principle or material factual misapprehension justified interference; application dismissed.
21 Mar 2007
The Court held that the judge correctly identified acts and mens rea attributable to the applicants despite using collective labels, properly admitted A1's voluntary interview records, and that the totality of insider testimony, contemporaneous documents, bank transfers and expert evidence established a conspiracy to defraud the minority shareholders and false accounting by A1; leave to appeal was refused. The Court ordered statutory loss‑of‑time and costs against A2 where appropriate.
16 Nov 1995
Leave to appeal was refused because the trial judge's acceptance of PW1's evidence, finding that the purported agreement was a forgery and that the applicant acted dishonestly, was supported by the evidence and not demonstrably wrong; therefore the conviction was amply justified.