Read the full judgment text of CACC 000600/1997 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 29 September 1998 before Power VP, Mayo JA, Rogers JA.
Criminal law – theft – stockbroker – pledging client shares without consent – using client shares to cover short-selling obligations – admissibility of statement to regulatory body – voir dire – procedural unfairness – leave to appeal against conviction – whether trial judge failed to make finding on dishonesty as essential element of each charge – held, no merit, dishonesty clearly inferable from surrounding circumstances including Applicant's full knowledge and admission of cash flow problems – whether material irregularity arose from trial judge excluding statement as evidence of its truth but reserving question of cross-examination use – held, no prejudice, any reserved ruling must be assumed to conform to law – whether trial judge failed to assess evidence of Barbara Chan and Christina To and suggestion that scheme was instigated by Ms To – held, no merit, judge was aware of Ms To's position, accepted her as satisfactory witness after considering whether she was accomplice, and accepted her evidence that she acted at Applicant's behest – convictions safe and satisfactory – application for leave to appeal dismissed
Legal issues: Failure to find dishonesty as element of theft · Material irregularity from reserved ruling on cross-examination use of excluded statement · Failure to assess and resolve evidence of Barbara Chan and Christina To
Outcome: Application for leave to appeal against conviction dismissed; convictions found to be neither unsafe nor unsatisfactory.