1 Nov 1991
Conviction quashed because the Crown failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the applicant had the requisite control of the hut on the specific date alleged; the evidence did not exclude reasonable possibilities that others controlled or guarded the hut and the case should not have been left to the jury, rendering the conviction unsafe.
24 May 1988
First applicant: admissions about distribution and fingerprints did not establish possession or control of the drugs in the premises and conviction on count two unsafe and quashed. Third applicant: prosecution relied on tenancy under s.47 but the jury were not fairly directed to decide whether control/possession existed on the relevant date given the sub‑tenancy allegation; conviction unsafe and quashed. Court ordered retrial under Criminal Procedure Ordinance s.83E/s.83F. Second applicant: sentences reviewed and held not manifestly wrong given total quantity and circumstances; application di…
18 Apr 1986
The evidence as a whole provided a prima facie case that the conspiracy was to rob and it was open to the jury to infer that intention; the judge's misdirection equating presence with charge or control for the statutory presumption was an error but harmless because a properly directed jury could and would have found joint possession/control; therefore convictions were upheld; sentences for conspiracy (10 years) were appropriate and certain firearms sentences were adjusted on appeal to reflect pleas and parity.
16 May 1977
First and third appellants' convictions were upheld because there was ample evidence of agreement to sell morphine and of possession of the drug recovered from the taxi; second appellant's conviction was quashed because the jury were not properly directed on central aspects of his defence and the conviction was therefore unsafe; fourth appellant's conviction was quashed because the presumption arising from possession of the key had been rebutted sufficiently and conviction was unsafe; appellate reduction of first and third sentences from 12 to 10 years was appropriate given sentence severity.