Read the full judgment text of CAAR 000022/1976 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment.
1. The Respondent was a Senior Superintendent in the Royal Hong Kong Police Force and, at the date of his conviction on a charge of maintaining a standard of living above that commensurate with his then present or past official emoluments, contrary to section 10(1) of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance, Cap. 201, was acting as Chief Superintendent, his post being Deputy District Commander, Kowloon. He had at that time served 23 years in the Royal Hong Kong Police Force. The simple fact to which
Cited by 2 cases