3 Oct 2024
Applying the re‑trial standard (HKCFA許麗琪 [2024] HKCFA 7), the court accepted the prosecution witnesses as credible and found that discrepancies in timing and video metadata were immaterial; the evidence established that the appellant participated in a prohibited group gathering contrary to Cap.599G beyond reasonable doubt, so the conviction stands.
14 Mar 2022
The Court held there was no miscarriage of justice: the judge's summing-up and directions were adequate on the challenged points (inferences about remainder pellets were permissible on PW1's evidence; immigration records were admissible and not speculative; PW1's credibility and incentive were fully aired and properly directed; admitted facts under s65C remain conclusive though the jury may resolve apparent conflicts), and the sentencing judge reasonably and conservatively computed the quantity attributable to D1 and applied the appropriate starting point and international enhancement; appeal…
19 Feb 1986
The convictions were quashed because the material before the magistrate was defective and insufficient: the particulars for the insurance offence were incorrect, the "agreed facts" were ambiguous and did not satisfy s65C requirements as to who made admissions, and the evidence did not establish that the driver lacked the specific statutory class licence required to prove the offence under the Road Traffic Ordinance; consequently the convictions could not stand.