8 May 2008
Applications dismissed because the points raised were either matters of settled law or were fact‑specific and dependent on trial evidence and therefore not of great and general importance; the 2nd applicant additionally failed to justify leave out of time.
7 Jan 2005
The judge's departure from standard jury directions—using an inappropriate boardroom analogy, exhorting "give and take" and implying that four-three disagreement was unacceptable—created a real risk that jurors abandoned their individual oaths and acquiesced to majority views; accordingly the convictions were unsafe and must be set aside with retrial ordered on specified counts.
6 Aug 1992
The trial judge's direction that the jury had to be unanimous in finding not guilty of murder before considering manslaughter was legally incorrect under s.24 of the Jury Ordinance, but the misdirection did not cause a miscarriage of justice because the jury were properly directed on manslaughter and returned unanimous guilty verdicts on the evidence, so the convictions stand.
15 Apr 1986
The conviction was upheld because the evidence, including the appellant's written and oral admissions that he placed his arm around the victim's neck and rendered her unconscious and other corroborating facts, entitled the jury to find an intent to cause grievous bodily harm, which suffices for murder; the cautioned statement was properly admitted and the summing up and unanimity directions were correct.