6 Dec 2006
The court held the premises satisfied the statute's definition of a club because basic amenities amounted to services; even assuming s.4(3) created absolute liability it could be severed leaving s.4(1)-(2) operative, and because the magistrate rejected the appellant's factual defence the conviction was properly maintained; appeal dismissed.
12 Apr 2002
The court held that the words 'without the general or special permission of the Chief Executive' in section 3 POBO operate as a negative averment and section 3 imposes strict (not absolute) liability; the common law defence of honest and reasonable mistake of fact is available to section 3 but the magistrate erred by effectively requiring the prosecution to disprove the defendant's claimed belief beyond reasonable doubt and by conflating mistake of fact with ignorance of the law; section 24 POBO does not import a statutory defence into section 3; accordingly the magistrate's acquittals were r…
15 Aug 1996
Section 6 of the Gambling Ordinance is a strict liability offence, not absolute; by necessary implication the statute admits a defence where the accused proves on the balance of probabilities an honest and reasonably held belief or reasonable excuse making the conduct innocent; therefore s6 meets Article 5(1) standards and the magistrate erred in concluding it was inconsistent with the Bill of Rights.