HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Criminal Appeal1971

LAU WAN WAH v. THE QUEEN

Related cases with same parties

  • CAAR10/1992THE QUEEN v. WONG MOK DIN
  • CAAR11/1986THE QUEEN v. CHUNG WAI-YIU
  • CAAR12/1986THE QUEEN v. HSU SAI-MAN AND ANOTHER
  • CAAR15/1986THE QUEEN v. WU KAM MING AND OTHERS
  • CAAR15/1987THE QUEEN v. LEUNG WING FAI
  • CAAR16/1987THE QUEEN v. PANG CHEUNG KIM
  • CAAR19/1986THE QUEEN v. CHAN CHI MAN
  • CAAR22/1986THE QUEEN v. WONG TAK-CHI
  • CAAR23/1986THE QUEEN v. MA LAI WU AND OTHERS
  • CAAR4/1986THE QUEEN v. LY XUONG THANH
  • CAAR5/1986THE QUEEN v. YEUNG KAM-WAH (D1) AND ANOTHER
  • CAAR8/1986THE QUEEN v. ALBERT STANLEY MALIA
  • CAAR9/1986THE QUEEN v. CHU TAI WAI AND ANOTHER
  • CAAR9/1989THE QUEEN v. CHAN KOON KWOK ARTHUR
  • CACC1000/1976LAI FAT v. THE QUEEN
  • CACC1000/1983THE QUEEN v. LEE HEI KEUNG
  • CACC1001/1979LAW WAI-MING AND ANOTHER v. THE QUEEN
  • CACC100/1972LIU KAM-MAN v. THE QUEEN
  • CACC100/1973LO WAI KEUNG v. THE QUEEN
  • CACC100/1977TAM YUK-MUI (F) v. THE QUEEN
6663-EN-1971-11-29

LAU WAN WAH v. THE QUEEN

HTML content

CACC000707/1971

 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(APPELLATE JURISDICTION)

 

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 707 OF 1971

-----------------

BETWEEN
LAU WAN WAHAppellant
and
THE QUEENRespondent

-----------------

Coram: Pickering, J.

Date of Judgment: 29th November, 1971.

 

-----------------

JUDGMENT

-----------------

 

1. The appellant was convicted of possession of dangerous drugs for the purpose of unlawful trafficking and sentenced to twelve months imprisonment.

2. There is no merit in the appeal in so far as possession of dangerous drugs is concerned but the case is, as the learned magistrate has appreciated in his Statement of Findings, another of those to which the presumption, contained in s.46 of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, did not in fact apply by virtue of a lacuna in the original version of the legislation. The details of that lacuna, which incidentally has now been filled, are sufficiently well-known not to require repetition here. It is sufficient to say that the conviction of possession for the purpose of unlawful trafficking is set aside and substituted by a conviction of simple possession of dangerous drugs. The sentence of twelve months imprisonment is set aside and replaced by a sentence of six months imprisonment.

 

Representation:

Appellant in person

Caird C.C. for Crown