21 Sept 1999
The appellant's plea was clear and unequivocal, entered in the presence of duty counsel and an interpreter, and accepted by the magistrate who found the facts disclosed all essential elements; therefore under s.113(1) the court was not empowered to entertain the appeal and the appeal was dismissed.
14 Jul 1992
The Court dismissed leave to appeal because the trial judge's summing-up was fair and detailed, the jury had ample evidence to convict the applicant for deliberate wounding, the non-production of a named witness did not render the trial unfair given that the defence could have called the witness, and the aggregate sentence of six years was not excessive for the deliberate serious wounds inflicted on defenceless victims.
4 Jan 1991
Where an officer in the course of duty obtains and records a driver’s name and driving licence particulars and that person later appears in court, those recorded particulars amount to sufficient evidence to raise a prima facie case on identity such that a magistrate should not dismiss for no case to answer; appearance to a summons alone is insufficient.
11 Sept 1979
The conviction was upheld because, viewing the entire evidence before the magistrate (including the constable's testimony and depositions admissible under s.118(1)(a) of the Magistrates Ordinance), there was sufficient evidence to identify the appellant as driver of BW 522 and to support the convictions; the appellate court may consider all evidence before the tribunal when identity was not contested below and no miscarriage of law occurred in leaving the case to the magistrate.