11 Feb 2010
The fresh evidence showing another person used the appellant's passport on 24 October 2006 met the statutory conditions for admission on appeal; had it been before the trial judge or the Court of Appeal the s.38(1)(b) conviction would have been unsafe; therefore the conviction must be quashed.
6 May 2004
Leave to appeal was refused because there was no basis to conclude the Court of Appeal had misapprehended the evidence or departed from accepted norms, and its application of the proviso was justified given the strength of the evidence against the applicant.
12 Jun 1980
The conviction was upheld because the Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant participated in the conspiracy; although one statement was wrongly admitted due to an inducement, the remaining evidence (witness testimony and corroborating facts) made the conviction safe and the proviso was applied to affirm the conviction.