29 Dec 2021
The magistrate erred by effectively shifting the burden and drawing impermissible adverse inferences; the proved facts and short ambiguous period of observation did not permit the only reasonable and irresistible inference of taking employment to be drawn for either appellant, therefore convictions were unsafe and were quashed.
24 Sept 2018
The judge refused certification because the four questions raised were factual issues reducible to the sufficiency and evaluation of evidence in this case rather than points of law of general importance; the magistrate's factual findings supported the inference that the applicants were engaged in unloading scrap metal as casual employees and the lorry, when considered together with the recycling yard and evidence of payment to the driver, was a usual place of employment for unloading.
18 Oct 2017
The Magistrate accepted PW1's credible evidence that the Appellant was assembling a stall in the context of multiple stalls and equipment; that conduct, in the absence of any plausible alternative explanation, gave rise to the only irresistible inference that the Appellant was taking employment (paid or unpaid); the misstatement that the employment was for money and the careless misquotation of Ip Po Fai did not render the conviction unsafe, and the appeal was dismissed.