27 Aug 2021
The guilty pleas were unequivocal and entered with legal representation; no fundamental mistake or other nullifying ground was identified, therefore under s113(1) Magistrates Ordinance the appeals against conviction fail and are dismissed.
30 Jul 1999
The appellant's guilty plea to Charge 3 was a nullity because he pleaded under a misunderstanding of law about an essential element (unlawful entry); therefore the court had jurisdiction under S.113 to hear the appeal, reversed and quashed the conviction on Charge 3, and, exercising powers under S.119(1)(d), substituted a conviction for breach of condition of stay (S.41 Immigration Ordinance) and set aside the 15‑month sentence, with further sentencing to follow.