22 Dec 2020
Court retained jurisdiction despite delay because costs had not been dealt with at the time of judgment; the delay resulted from defence counsel's oversight and not from the defendant; the acquittal was non‑technical and defendant is therefore entitled to trial costs of HK$6,016; costs occasioned by the delayed application are to be borne by the parties respectively.
2 Dec 2020
The court held that it could amend the certificate of sentence under the slip rule because the written record did not reflect the court's manifest intention; further, having regard to the 2014 amendment to s.80 DCO and subsequent authorities, a District Court sentence is not finally recorded for perfection/functus officio purposes until the written reasons are signed and delivered under s.80, so the court was not functus officio at the time of the proposed amendment.
15 Mar 2016
The forfeiture order had not been perfected because the court’s confiscation form was not finally recorded (yellow copy filed) at the time counsel returned to seek re-opening; therefore the trial judge was not functus officio and erred in refusing to re-open the matter — the forfeiture order is quashed and the matter remitted for fresh determination.
10 Dec 2012
The slip rule permits correction of a perfected judgment to remedy an accidental mechanistic drafting error so long as the amendment merely gives effect to the court's manifest intention and does not alter the substance or rationale of the judgment; accordingly paragraph 47 was amended to order the whole 3-year sentence for count 3 to run consecutively producing a total sentence of 13 years imprisonment.
16 Nov 2012
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal: it held it had no jurisdiction to stay or strike out the already registered IDT Order because registration under s.29 converted the Tribunal's Order into a Court of First Instance order, perfection had occurred and the residual discretion to reopen was not satisfied; the IDT's decision‑making did not amount to exercise of the HKSAR's judicial power under the Basic Law and the act of registration was an administrative act performed by the Registrar and thus subject to judicial review rather than being an exercise of judicial power by the IDT.
3 Feb 2012
The court refused the DPP's application to reopen its prior determination and order a retrial because, on the facts and having regard to the perfection rule and the highly exceptional nature of any residual discretion to vary a decision, it was not appropriate to reopen the matter. The prosecution had withdrawn its application in open court, the appellant would suffer prejudice and uncertainty, and the prosecution was largely responsible for its own change of position; accordingly the court would not vary its earlier effective decision to make no order for retrial and directed that the convic…
5 Dec 2008
The perfection rule applies to magisterial appeals to the CFI; the decision of the judge is only perfected when the magistrates' clerk enters the judge's memorandum in the magistrates' register kept under s.35(1) of the Magistrates Ordinance (the computerized register); until that entry the judge may alter his decision; the first written judgment purporting to dismiss the appeal was legally void and the second written judgment properly constitutes the reasons for the oral decision allowing the appeal.