Read the full judgment text of HCMA 000833/1988 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment.
1. The appellants were two, of, a number of defendants, in charges alleging offences contrary to the Gambling Ordinance. The 1st appellant was the second defendant and faced a charge of managing a gambling establishment and the second appellant was, the third defendant who faced a charge of assisting in the management of a gambling establishment