22 Mar 2006
The conviction was quashed because the appellate court found the evidence against the applicant did not prove beyond reasonable doubt that he knew or believed the cars were stolen; the available acts and documents amounted to suspicion only and there was insufficient admissible evidence to support an inference of guilty knowledge.
16 Aug 1996
The Court held that the trial judge lawfully and reasonably accepted the taped conversations and transcripts as establishing the three conspiracies; the applicant's criticisms (chain of custody, non‑production of informant/statements/vehicles, alleged bias) did not undermine the conviction; the sentencing decision, including a discount for involvement of ICAC agents, was within principled bounds and not manifestly excessive; accordingly leave to appeal against conviction and sentence was refused.
2 Mar 1993
The Court held that the aggregate of circumstantial evidence — D1's arranging shipments and typing incorrect engine/chassis numbers, false documentation and registration books supplied to consignee, significant payments and transfers from the Malaysian consignee and his associates, D2's company used as shipper with D2's fingerprints on shipping documents, plus demonstrable lies in cautioned statements — supported the only reasonable inference that both appellants knowingly conspired with Richard Ho to remove, dispose of and realize stolen vehicles; convictions and sentences were therefore uph…
1 Aug 1991
The Court allowed the appeal in part, holding that having regard to relative criminality the 4.5 year sentence for conspiracy was excessive and that, as a matter of principle, the sentence for the substantive handling offence should not exceed the appropriate sentence for the conspiracy; sentences were reduced and ordered to run concurrently.