|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 1970 |
|
|
Appeal allowed where identification of recovered items and co-accused's inconsistent statements left guilt unproven beyond reasonable doubt.
* Criminal law – Appeal against conviction for housebreaking and stealing – Insufficient proof beyond reasonable doubt.
* Evidence – Identification of recovered property – failure to conclusively link items to complainant.
* Witness credibility – inconsistent statements by co-accused undermining prosecution case.
* Remedy – conviction quashed, sentence set aside, release ordered.
|
11 December 1970 |
|
Appeal allowed where later-found items, absent at an earlier search, could have been planted, undermining the conviction.
Criminal law – search and seizure – subsequent discovery of alleged stolen goods in accused's absence – possibility of planted evidence – sufficiency of prosecution case – appeal allowed.
|
4 December 1970 |
|
Appeal allowed: unclear/insufficient charge and improper trial restriction led to quashing of conviction and sentence.
Criminal law – adequacy and clarity of charge and particulars – whether alleged payment to third party constituted attempt to influence witnesses – impropriety of restricting accused’s movement during trial – appellate relief by quashing conviction.
|
4 December 1970 |
|
Conviction for housebreaking upheld; corporal punishment set aside because it contravened the statutory age prohibition.
Criminal law – conviction for housebreaking and stealing; identification parade and witness testimony as proof; sentencing – previous convictions must be put to accused before being considered; corporal punishment unlawful where statute prohibits given accused's recorded age.
|
2 December 1970 |
| November 1970 |
|
|
Appellant’s unsworn child-witness required corroboration; conviction upheld and sentence increased to four years.
Criminal law – grievous harm (s.225 Penal Code); Evidence – child witness of tender years, unsworn evidence and statutory corroboration (s.127(2) Evidence Act); Procedure – necessity of court-recorded examination of child’s understanding of duty to speak truth; Sentencing – appellate enhancement of sentence (s.319 Criminal Procedure Code).
|
25 November 1970 |
|
|
14 November 1970 |
|
The applicant's honest claim of right negates robbery where violence did not facilitate taking property.
Criminal law – Robbery with violence – element of violence must be used to obtain or retain property – Assault may be merely an assault simpliciter if not used to facilitate taking – Claim of right as defence to stealing – honest belief, not manifestly unreasonable, can defeat conviction.
|
8 November 1970 |
|
External fingerprints alone, without corroboration, do not safely support a theft conviction; conviction quashed.
Criminal law – sufficiency of fingerprint evidence – external fingerprints insufficient without corroboration; burden of proof on prosecution; improper to penalise accused for not calling unattainable witness.
|
6 November 1970 |
|
Confession to police wrongly admitted but conviction upheld; imprisonment reduced to two years, corporal punishment retained.
Prevention of Corruption Ordinance – scope of offence – acceptance of money by an agent/public servant with limited duties; Evidence – admissibility of confessions to police – confession to another offence inadmissible; Appeal – erroneous admission of statement – harmless irregularity where conviction supported by direct evidence; Sentencing – reduction where offender is not part of larger conspiracy and is a first offender.
|
4 November 1970 |
|
Admission and fingerprint evidence upheld conviction; unproven duress and co-accused testimony did not warrant interference.
Criminal law – shopbreaking and stealing – sufficiency of evidence – admissions and fingerprint evidence – defence of duress – reliance on co-accused’s testimony and appellate deference to trial court credibility findings.
|
4 November 1970 |
| October 1970 |
|
|
Burglary reduced to house‑breaking for lack of night‑entry proof; stealing upheld; single corporal sentence imposed.
* Criminal law – Burglary v house‑breaking – requirement to prove night‑time entry for burglary. * Evidence – absence of proof as to when premises were last secured defeats burglary charge. * Sentencing – Corporal Punishment Ordinance (Cap.17) s.10 limits multiple corporal sentences to a single corporal punishment. * Stealing convictions and custodial sentences upheld.
|
24 October 1970 |
|
Robbery conviction upheld where deception plus physical restraint overcame resistance; minor violence suffices, degree affecting sentence.
* Criminal law – Robbery with violence – combination of deception and restraint – trick plus physical restraint constitutes robbery. * Degree of violence – minor violence or threatened violence may suffice; degree relevant to sentence not definition. * Sentencing – appellate confirmation of custodial terms and corporal punishment waiver due to age. * Procedure – records of previous convictions should accompany appeal papers.
|
23 October 1970 |
|
Convictions quashed where charge omitted essential ingredient (creation of disturbance) and evidence was insufficient; magistrate showed prejudice.
Criminal law – Offence of conduct likely to cause breach of the peace (Penal Code s.89(1)(b)) – essential ingredient that a disturbance was created – defective charge; Criminal procedure – sufficiency and particularity of charge; Judicial conduct – impartiality of magistrate; Police powers – lawfulness and necessity of arrest, search and denial of bail.
|
21 October 1970 |
|
Appellant’s convictions quashed where contradictory witness statements and delayed reporting rendered prosecution evidence unsafe.
Criminal law – Evidence – Credibility and contradictions in witness testimony; delay in reporting suspected theft to police; proof beyond reasonable doubt; return/disposal of recovered property.
|
21 October 1970 |
|
Bribery conviction upheld; sentence reduced to immediate discharge and forfeiture set aside due to mitigating circumstances.
Criminal law – Corruption (Prevention of Corruption Ordinance s.3(2)) – Credibility of police evidence – Arrest powers under Traffic Ordinance s.69 – Definition of public road – Sentencing discretion under Minimum Sentences Act; mitigation on recommendation of Social Welfare Commissioner – Forfeiture ultra vires where bribe not seized from offender.
|
16 October 1970 |
|
The appellant’s appeal against a theft conviction was summarily rejected and the one-year sentence upheld.
Criminal law – Theft – Credibility and sufficiency of evidence regarding ownership and sale; conflicting evidence as to make of bicycle; defence witnesses unhelpful; sentence not excessive; appeal summarily dismissed.
|
16 October 1970 |
|
Appeal summarily rejected; convictions for burglary and stealing upheld on possession, recovery and identification evidence.
Criminal law – Burglary and stealing – Conviction upheld where stolen property recovered, possession and parade identification reliable, and accused’s explanation inconsistent.
|
16 October 1970 |
|
Identification upheld and joint participation in theft found; conviction affirmed and sentence raised to nine months.
Criminal law – Identification evidence – reliability where complainant knew accused and there was street lighting; Joint liability – receiving stolen property and absconding constitutes joint participation in theft; Distinction between theft and robbery where force is used; Sentencing – appellate increase for inadequacy.
|
16 October 1970 |
|
A conviction for stealing by agent was substituted with obtaining by false pretences where the applicant willingly handed over money induced by false pretence.
* Criminal law – Distinction between stealing by agent and obtaining by false pretences – where victim voluntarily parts with property induced by false representation, offence is obtaining by false pretences (s.302 Penal Code). * Criminal Procedure – Substitution of conviction under s.187 CrPC. * Evidence – corroboration of payment and witness testimony supports trial court findings.
|
16 October 1970 |
|
Appeal dismissed; conviction for unlawful wounding upheld on credible eyewitness and identification evidence.
Criminal law – Unlawful wounding (s. 228(1) Penal Code) – Identification and eyewitness evidence – Appeal – Insufficient grounds where appellant only disputes trial findings without substantive new grounds or evidence.
|
15 October 1970 |
|
Appellant's conviction for cattle theft affirmed on credible evidence; appeal and sentence challenge dismissed.
* Criminal law – Theft – Cattle theft – Sufficiency of evidence and credibility findings – Identification and tracing of stolen animals; * Appeal – Review of trial court’s factual findings and credibility assessments – No grounds to interfere; * Sentence – Appropriateness of three-year term for cattle theft and incompetence of appeal against sentence.
|
14 October 1970 |
|
Conviction overturned where inconsistent witness accounts failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – Burglary and stealing – Identification and credibility of witnesses; inconsistencies in eyewitness accounts; proof beyond reasonable doubt; conduct of accused (giving name/address) inconsistent with thief behaviour.
|
14 October 1970 |
|
Appeals without substantial grounds may be summarily dismissed; s.296(1) is a composite offence and compensation is immediately enforceable.
Criminal law – summary dismissal of appeals lacking sufficient grounds; s.296(1) composite offence (breaking and entry plus felony) – caution against convicting separately for underlying felony; conviction for forgery and stealing by servant upheld where secretary failed to verify payment; compensation orders must be immediately effective; appellate certification of frivolous appeals.
|
13 October 1970 |
|
Circumstantial evidence and prior threats upheld as sufficient to sustain arson conviction; appeal summarily dismissed.
* Criminal law – Arson (s. 519(a) Penal Code) – sufficiency of circumstantial evidence to prove deliberate burning. * Evidence – prior threats and warnings as circumstantial evidence of intent. * Appeal procedure – summary rejection of meritless appeal (no sufficient ground). * Sentence review – two-year imprisonment for arson not excessive.
|
13 October 1970 |
|
Court upheld arson conviction and three-year sentence where evidence and inferences reasonably established guilt.
* Criminal law – Arson – Sufficiency of evidence – Threats, timing and absence after leaving neighbour’s house supported inference of guilt.
* Criminal procedure – Alibi evidence – Failure to call alibi witness and weak supporting witnesses undermined alibi.
* Sentencing – Proportionality – Three-year term for arson not excessive given local incidence of arson.
|
12 October 1970 |
|
Court upheld magistrate’s exercise of discretion to impose below‑minimum sentence, dismissing the appeal as without merit.
* Criminal law – Sentencing – Minimum Sentences Act 1963 s.5(a) – Whether smallness of amount constitutes "special circumstances" permitting sentence below statutory minimum.
* Sentencing discretion – consideration of age and first‑offender status as mitigating factors.
* Appeal – summary dismissal where no sufficient grounds are shown.
|
10 October 1970 |
|
Circumstantial evidence and close timing justified magistrate’s inference of guilt; conviction and sentence affirmed.
* Criminal law – Circumstantial evidence – Inferences of guilt from closely related facts and timing – Sufficiency of circumstantial proof to convict.
* Criminal procedure – Appellate/Review scrutiny of magistrate’s findings – Deference to magistrate’s evaluation of witness credibility and inferences.
|
8 October 1970 |
|
Appellant’s admissions and clear accounting evidence rendered the appeal incompetent; court declined to interfere with three-year sentences.
Criminal law – Appeal under summary procedure (s. 317) – Admission of facts by appellant and clear accounting evidence – Misappropriation/theft by a public servant – Sentence of three years on each count not excessive – Appeal dismissed.
|
8 October 1970 |
|
Appeal against conviction for possession of stolen property dismissed; identification and recovery evidence upheld as sufficient.
* Criminal law – possession of stolen property – recovery of stolen articles from accused’s premises – victim identification of goods – sufficiency of evidence to prove possession and guilt.
|
8 October 1970 |
|
Appeal dismissed: distinctive identification of stolen shoes justified conviction and magistrate’s credibility findings affirmed.
Criminal law – Identification evidence – Identification of allegedly stolen property by distinctive marks and witness description – Delay between offence and identification – Appellate review of trial magistrate’s credibility findings.
|
8 October 1970 |
|
|
8 October 1970 |
|
Convictions for stealing state lottery and TAPA funds upheld; statutory minimum sentence imposed and sentences ordered concurrent.
Criminal law – stealing by agent – proof of receipt and non-remittance of ticket books/proceeds; evidentiary weight of postal records and witness testimony; statutory minimum sentence for theft of government funds; concurrent versus consecutive sentencing; confirmation of compensation order.
|
7 October 1970 |
|
Conviction quashed where receipt of subordinate’s wages lacked proof of dishonest intent beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – Theft – mens rea – Receipt of funds intended for another does not alone establish dishonest intent; conviction unsafe absent proof beyond reasonable doubt.
|
7 October 1970 |
|
The applicant’s appeal against criminal trespass conviction is dismissed; court urged officials to assess compensation for crop loss.
Criminal law – Criminal trespass – Persistence in cultivating demarcated estate land after warning – Inference of intention to annoy – Conviction sustainable; ancillary claim for compensation to be determined by authorities.
|
7 October 1970 |
|
Appeal dismissed: convictions and 3‑year sentence for forgery, uttering and stealing upheld; handwriting proof needed for some counts.
• Criminal law – forgery, uttering and stealing by servant – sufficiency of evidence to prove authorship and identity. • Evidence – necessity of handwriting expert to establish common authorship of disputed documents. • Forensic evidence – weight of fingerprint/thumb‑print evidence and accused’s admissions. • Sentencing – prior convictions relevant to proportionality of term. • Professional conduct – counsel’s conduct criticized but not prejudicial to merits.
|
7 October 1970 |
|
Appeal dismissed: identification upheld, convictions confirmed, custodial sentences increased and corporal punishment affirmed.
Criminal law – Robbery with violence – Identification evidence and corroboration – Appeal against conviction – Sentence review and increase – Corporal punishment and requirement to find age under Minimum Sentences Act.
|
7 October 1970 |
|
Conviction quashed where prosecution failed to identify property and defence witnesses were wrongly discredited.
Criminal law – Stealing by public servant – Identification of stolen property – Prosecution must prove ownership/identification of specific items – Appellate intervention where conviction unsupported by evidence and defence witnesses improperly discredited.
|
7 October 1970 |
|
Conviction quashed where receipt of wages was proved but dishonest intent to steal was not established beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – Theft by public servant – Receipt of money established but dishonest intent not proved beyond reasonable doubt – Conviction unsafe and quashed; restitution order survives.
|
7 October 1970 |
|
Burglary conviction substituted for housebreaking due to daytime entry; cattle theft convictions upheld on identification evidence.
Criminal law – Burglary v. housebreaking – requirement of night for burglary – where entry occurred before nightfall, burglary conviction substituted with housebreaking; Identification evidence – recovery and positive identification of multiple stolen articles and eyewitness report sufficient to uphold cattle theft convictions; Sentencing – alteration of conviction did not necessitate sentence variation.
|
4 October 1970 |
|
The appellate court summarily rejected the applicant's appeal for lack of sufficient grounds in light of credible eyewitness evidence.
* Criminal appeal – summary rejection – appeal lacking sufficient grounds – appellate interference only when trial findings unsupported by credible evidence; eyewitness testimony – credibility and sufficiency.
|
3 October 1970 |
|
Conviction for cattle theft quashed due to reasonable doubt and prosecution's failure to call a key co‑participant.
Criminal law – cattle theft – reliance on circumstantial and witness evidence – credibility and inconsistencies in prosecution witness – failure to charge or call alleged co‑participant – reasonable doubt – unsafe conviction.
|
2 October 1970 |
|
Probation breach sentence set aside where underlying conviction was quashed; original probation order valid and cases unrelated.
Criminal law – stealing by agent – probation – validity of breach where underlying conviction quashed – res judicata – separate prosecutions – setting aside sentence and release from custody.
|
2 October 1970 |
| September 1970 |
|
|
Appeal highlights failure to prove which statements in complaint letters were false and the need to probe reasons for dismissals.
Criminal law — Giving false information and libel — Burden to prove falsity — Importance of identifying which statements are false — Relevance of investigating reasons for dismissals/transfers — Truth as defence to libel.
|
30 September 1970 |
|
Appeal dismissed: conviction upheld on credible possession and sale evidence; minimum-sentence regime inapplicable without proof of knowledge of government ownership.
* Criminal law – theft – identification and possession evidence – acceptance of witness credibility corroborated by spouse and police inquiry.
* Criminal law – element of knowledge – applicability of minimum-sentence regime for theft of government property requires proof accused knew or ought to have known ownership.
* Appeals – appellate review of trial court's credibility findings – appellate court will not interfere absent perversity or misdirection.
|
30 September 1970 |
|
Appellant’s conversion of government pay to private use upheld as stealing; accomplice evidence admissible without mandatory corroboration.
Criminal law – stealing by public servant – conversion of government pay to private use (s.258); accomplice evidence – no absolute rule requiring corroboration (s.142) – appellate re-hearing and assessment of credibility.
|
30 September 1970 |
|
Deliberate removal of viscera to avoid veterinary inspection breaches the Animal Diseases Ordinance; conviction upheld, sentence varied.
* Animal Diseases Ordinance (Cap.156) – sections 17 and 4(1) – failure to produce carcass when required – removal/sale of viscera to avoid inspection constitutes offence.
* Interpretation – 'carcass' includes 'other parts of an animal' (viscera).
* Evidence – deliberate concealment of viscera and false statements support conviction despite professional lapse by initial certifying officer.
* Sentence – appellate variation of fine and imprisonment; lower court's alternative term unlawful.
|
30 September 1970 |
|
Whether police officers’ acceptance of money from a motorist to avoid charging him constituted a corrupt transaction under the Prevention of Corruption law.
Criminal law — Corruption — Whether receipt of money by police officers in circumstances of stopping a motorist constitutes corrupt inducement under Prevention of Corruption provisions — Evidence and credibility — Corroboration and proof beyond reasonable doubt — Significance of officers’ duty status and concealment of transaction.
|
28 September 1970 |
|
Appellants’ convictions for theft by public servants upheld due to credible evidence and statutory sentencing.
Criminal law – Theft by public servant – Falsification of payment vouchers – Credibility findings of trial court – Appellate interference; Sentence – statutory penalty; corporal punishment.
|
28 September 1970 |
|
Whether handwriting and receipt evidence establish stealing by a public servant entrusted with court revenues.
Criminal law – Stealing by a public officer – Proof of receipt – Documentary evidence and handwriting identification – Proof beyond reasonable doubt – Absence and failure to account for entrusted funds.
|
28 September 1970 |
|
Conviction under transport-control regulation quashed because beans were not covered by the regulation's Schedule.
Criminal law – statutory interpretation – transport control regulation – scope of 'agricultural products' defined by Schedule – goods not listed (beans) fall outside offence; conviction quashed.
|
24 September 1970 |