20 Mar 2006
Leave to amend was granted because on the material before the court the proposed averment was not entirely hopeless and the contested factual matters (what instructions were given and what the 1st defendant knew) are appropriate to be determined at trial rather than on an interlocutory application.
10 May 1991
The coroner failed to direct the jury properly by not considering the applicant's state of mind and reasons for each shot and by misdirecting on Police General Orders; as a result the unanimous verdict of death by unlawful killing was irrational and perverse and must be quashed by certiorari.
5 Oct 1990
The Court held the trial judge properly considered the cautioned statement and credibility issues, reasonably found a warning was given and DPC459 to be truthful, and therefore the conviction was not unsafe; the application for leave to appeal is refused.
11 May 1989
The trial judge's acceptance of the constable's evidence was undermined by material inconsistencies (disputed number of persons exiting, misassessment of machine No.37 evidence, implausible explanation for bloodstains, and a ballistic firing angle inconsistent with the constable's description), rendering the conviction unsafe; accordingly the appeal is allowed and the conviction quashed.