29 Aug 2019
Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant's stated matters did not constitute valid grounds of appeal, had been addressed previously or lacked reasonable prospects of success, interpreter services were available and documents were in English, and the matters did not meet the statutory threshold of general or public importance under s22(1)(b) Cap 484.
26 May 1992
The magistrate properly confined himself to the admissible evidence and made a prima facie finding justifying committal; the Attorney‑General's Guidelines do not impose a duty of disclosure on extradition magistrates at committal and the magistrate lacks power under the treaty and extradition legislation to order the general disclosure sought; alleged nondisclosure and inclusion of inadmissible material did not render the committal unfair or void, therefore both the habeas corpus and judicial review applications fail.
1 Feb 1980
The bind over orders were set aside because the magistrate lacked adequate evidential basis to conclude the appellants were likely to repeat the conduct: the first appellant was a victim and the second's conduct was minimal and unexplained only because not asked; adverse findings based on brief demeanour in the witness box were insufficient to justify preventive orders.