26 May 2022
Leave to appeal was refused because the judge had comprehensively considered the evidence and made permissible factual findings on funding, contributions and the transfer agreement; there was no realistic prospect of overturning those findings and the agreement provided a good reason to depart from equal property division. Consequently the application for leave lacked merit.
23 Mar 2021
The court allowed the amendment to the charge to include Huagingshan Road and, on a re‑hearing of the evidence before the trial judge, concluded that the appellant's driving—driving downhill for about 2–3 km with an unsecured excavator—fell far below the standard of a competent careful driver and was obviously dangerous under s37 RTO; the conviction for dangerous driving was therefore upheld and the appeal dismissed.
13 Dec 2007
The Court allowed the appeal and quashed the conviction because the Magistrate's findings incorporated extraneous considerations (failure to study maps and route planning) and it was unclear whether the conviction rested solely on the relevant fact of vehicle positioning obstructing traffic, rendering the conviction unsafe.
27 Dec 1996
The magistrate was sure, on the evidence before him, that the appellant exceeded the relevant speed limit; that factual finding was the only reasonable conclusion from the record and therefore the appellate court must dismiss the appeal and uphold the conviction.