26 Feb 1991
Because the evidence (police observations and expert explanation of 'Lok Shui') permitted a reasonable alternative inference other than that the appellant was taking commission and managing the gambling establishment, the magistrate's exclusive inference of guilt was unsafe; accordingly the conviction was quashed and associated penalty remedied.
13 Nov 1986
The magistrate and appellate court accepted D.1's cautioned admission that he was the manager and, given the size and primary purpose of the premises for gambling, concluded he knowingly managed premises used as a gambling establishment; D.2's issuance of membership and opening of accounts and D.3's role as cashier were direct, non-menial functions facilitating gambling and sufficed to show assistance in management; defendants failed to discharge the burden to prove the statutory exception in section 3(4).
28 Jul 1982
Where gambling equipment was found s.19(1) created a presumption that the premises were a gambling establishment which the appellants failed to rebut; a person proved to have managed or assisted in management of such premises cannot plausibly deny awareness of its nature; facts (chips of differing colours, payments for cubicles and equipment, business organized for mahjong) established gaming promoted by way of trade or business and thus unlawful gaming, so convictions were upheld.