6 Sept 2022
The magistrate, having seen and tested the witnesses, permissibly accepted the credibility of PW1 and PW2, correctly excluded D20 as inadmissible hearsay, and validly amended the charge without causing injustice; on that basis the convictions on Charges 1 and 3 were properly supported by the evidence and the appeal is dismissed.
5 Jan 2000
The Magistrate correctly admitted the documentary records under Evidence Ordinance s22 because the statutory preconditions were satisfied and the relevant witnesses were competent; the appellant failed to discharge the burden on a balance of probabilities to prove lawful authority under Prevention of Bribery Ordinance s9(5), so the conviction was rightly upheld.
15 Jan 1988
The trial judge erred by excluding the five telexes solely because the recipient 'D. Wong' was not identified within the documents; extrinsic evidence (witness testimony) established identity and relevance, the procedural defects in the hearsay notice were inadvertent and did not cause prejudice, and therefore under Order 38 r.29(1) it was just to admit the telexes into evidence.