14 May 1997
Because the officer was not lawfully inside the appellant's premises and had no warrant, he had no authority to demand identity or to lawfully threaten an obstruction charge; given the substantial doubt this created in the prosecution's case, the conviction could not stand and was quashed.
25 Oct 1988
The court held the entry was lawfully authorised: the s23 Gambling Authorisation was effectively proved by evidence that the signer was a Superintendent despite omission of rank, and alternatively the entry was lawful under s50 of the Police Force Ordinance; therefore the evidence was admissible and the conviction was upheld.
1 Aug 1979
Although the court found the Crown had not established that the original entry was lawful under s16 Cap.213, the arrest of the appellant was lawful because the officers had reasonable grounds from observations on the premises and under s50(1) Police Force Ordinance; further, once the appellant brandished a chopper and threatened officers the arrest was clearly justified; appellant knew she was under arrest and her violent conduct constituted resisting arrest and criminal intimidation, so the appeal is dismissed.