SIU HAI KA AND OTHERS v. R.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

1992, No. 159
(Criminal)

_____________

_____________________

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

_____________________

Macdougall, V.-P.:

1. These are two references by the Governor which for the sake of convenience can be dealt with together.

2. Following the decision of the Privy Council in A.G. v. Lee Kwong-kut [1993] AC 951 delivered on 19 May 1993 in which it was held that section 30 of the Summary Offences Ordinance Cap 228 had been repealed by the Bill of Rights Ordinance Cap 383, an exhaustive search was conducted in all court, police and duty lawyer scheme records to identify all cases in which defendants had been convicted of offences under section 30 subsequent to the coming into operation of the Bill of Rights Ordinance.

3. That search resulted in the discovery of 364 such convictions in the Magistrates Courts and one in the District Court. The 364 persons affected by the convictions in the Magistrates Court form the subject of one of the References while the remaining person forms the subject of the other.

4. The Crown, very properly, does not seek to uphold these convictions.

5. In the light of the decision to which we have referred we order that the conviction recorded against each of the persons named in the two References be quashed and that each sentence be set aside.