21 Oct 2011
Application for a certificate was refused because the point certified was not argued in the appeal and cannot be revived absent very exceptional circumstances; the Court declined to decide the Secretary for Justice substitution/jurisdiction issue because it was not argued and therefore would require a hearing where the issue had been properly developed.
17 May 2000
On a s.104 review a magistrate has the power under s.27 to amend an information by substituting a lesser offence provided the substituted offence arises from the same or substantially the same facts and would not have been time‑barred when the prosecution was commenced; such an amendment is treated retrospectively to the start of the prosecution and is permissible where it causes no injustice. Appeal dismissed.
29 Mar 1999
The court held that s104 of the Magistrates Ordinance authorises a magistrate to re-open and re-hear a case and, in doing so, to exercise the functions of an adjudicating magistrate under ss19 and 27 including allowing an amendment to the information; the amendment substituting a s3 POBO offence was lawful because the information had been originally laid within the relevant period so s31A was not breached and s32 permits conviction of alternative Part II offences without fresh consent; the application for judicial review was dismissed.