23 Jun 1998
The Court held the convictions were safe because the trial judge properly assessed identification evidence as credible, found the applicant and his witness lied thereby eliminating the alibi, and her interventions in questioning witnesses were clarificatory and did not render the trial unfair; therefore the prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.
6 Jan 1988
The Court held that the trial judge's post‑cross‑examination questioning did not, in quality or quantity, render the convictions unsafe or deprive the applicants of a fair trial; accordingly leave to appeal against conviction and sentence was denied and the concurrent sentences of three years on each count were upheld as within the trial judge's discretion and not manifestly excessive.
7 Aug 1987
The judge's questions were within the permissible role of eliciting clarification and assisting the jury rather than impermissible cross-examination showing disbelief; the questions did not prejudice the fairness of the trial and therefore leave to appeal against conviction is refused.
13 Nov 1984
The warrant and committal were quashed because the record showed the applicant had obeyed the summons and given evidence, there was no refusal to give evidence within s.36(1)(b), and the judge failed to afford the procedural protections and fair opportunity to explain or obtain representation required before summary committal; accordingly habeas corpus was granted and the warrant set aside.
26 Apr 1984
The magistrate's credibility findings were permissible; the evidence supported an inference that the appellants acted jointly and shared the intention to intimidate; the magistrate's question did not prejudice the defence or supply substantive evidence; therefore the convictions are upheld.
14 Mar 1975
The appeal was allowed because the trial judge repeatedly took over and conducted extensive cross-examination, creating the appearance of partiality; the trial was not conducted with manifest impartiality and the irregularity was not one the court could disregard using the proviso.