香港特別行政區(qū)6514672415(參考版)
2025-06-28 02:58本頁(yè)面
【正文】 。 (潘敏琦) 高等法院原訟法庭暫委法官控方：由律政司高級(jí)檢控官陳淑慧代表香港特別行政區(qū)。日已沒(méi)有經(jīng)營(yíng)該食肆及在事發(fā)當(dāng)天並不在場(chǎng)，這些說(shuō)法並不影響她作出上訴人是容受當(dāng)時(shí)違例情況的唯一合理推論，裁判官並無(wú)顛倒舉證責(zé)任，上訴人大律師不宜斷章取義。本席閱讀裁斷陳述書有關(guān)段落之上文下理，認(rèn)為裁判官旨在指出，儘管上訴人在會(huì)面記錄中表示她在3本案並沒(méi)任何證供顯示上訴人沒(méi)有能力阻止或曾採(cǎi)取任何合理步驟阻止他人作出該違規(guī)作為，在本案整體證供的層面上，裁判官有權(quán)作出上訴人對(duì)該違例作為是知情、而上訴人是採(cǎi)取漠視不理的態(tài)度的唯一合理推論。日才獲食環(huán)署正式批準(zhǔn)。年10月5J說(shuō)：「“… permit” means one of two things, either to give leave for an act which without that leave could not be legally done, or to abstain from taking reasonable steps to prevent the act where it is within a man’s power to prevent it …」 獲控辯雙方承認(rèn)的事實(shí)指出上訴人在2007 上訴人大律師依賴Berton v. Alliance Economic Investment Co. [1922]299一案中裁定了：『Where the inference of guilt is available to the tribunal of facts and no explanation is given, it is not open to plain on appeal that another inference was available to be drawn, p
法律信息相關(guān)推薦
鄂ICP備17016276號(hào)-1