Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Section 81 reservation jurisdiction

Legal area

Court

8 Jun 1994

Re JUDGE\'S RESERVATION (NO. 1) OF 1994 & ATTORNEY GENERAL\'S REFERENCE (NO. 1) OF 1994

Citation

Re JUDGE\'S RESERVATION (NO. 1) OF 1994 & ATTORNEY GENERAL\'S REFERENCE (NO. 1) OF 1994
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAQL1/1994

The Court held that a s81 reservation made after acquittal is incompetent and that, under s73A, costs may be ordered to be paid out of public revenue only where the acquitted person was liable for those costs (private representation or legally aided with a contribution); where a legally aided acquitted person made no contribution and was not liable, no order for payment out of public revenue should be made.
30 Sept 1991

R. V. SIN YAU MING

Citation

R. V. SIN YAU MING
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC289/1990

By majority the Court held ss.46(c) and (d) and ss.47(1)(c),(d) and s.47(3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance are inconsistent with Article 11(1) because the statutory presumptions do not meet the required rational connection and proportionality tests (they permit conviction despite reasonable doubt); under s.3(2) of the Bill of Rights Ordinance those provisions are repealed to the extent of the inconsistency (effectively from 8 June 1991); the Court also confirmed jurisdiction to hear a s.81 reservation pre-conviction though such referrals should be rare.