| 单词 | Unsafe and unsatisfactory verdict |
| 释义 | 不穩妥及不令人滿意的裁決 A verdict that should be set aside on the grounds that the jury acting reasonably ought to have had a sufficient doubt to entitle the appellant to an acquittal. The Court of Appeal must allow an appeal against conviction if it thinks that the conviction should be set aside on the ground that under all the circumstances of the case it is unsafe or unsatisfactory: Criminal Procedure Ordinance (Cap 221) s 83(1)(a). Examples of cases where a conviction has been found to be unsafe or unsatisfactory are: (1) where there is a ‘lurking doubt’ that the conviction is not safe and satisfactory (Stafford and Luvaglio v DPP [1974] AC 878, [1973] 3 All ER 762 (HL); Kwong Kin Hung v R [1997] HKLRD 15, [1996] 3 HKC 698 (PC)); (2) excessive judicial intervention (R v Tam Chi-pang & Ors [1986] HKLR 1122 (CA)); (3) improper comments by the trial judge in his summing-up to the jury or reasons for verdict (R v Turnbull [1977] QB 224, [1976] 3 All ER 549 (CA)); (4) the jury has returned inconsistent verdicts (HKSAR v Chan Chi-hou (CACC 1/97, unreported)); (5) failure of disclosure by the prosecution (R v Maguire [1992] QB 936, 2 All ER 433 (CA)); (6) failure of the court to evaluate the evidence (R v Chan Hoi-lung [1988] HKC 162, 2 HKLR 318 (CA)); (7) inadequate consideration of identification evidence (R v Ho Kwok-man (CACC 526/85, unreported)); (8) failure to direct properly with regard to corroboration (R v Ma Shing (CACC 292/85, unreported); (9) misconduct or bias on the part of a juror (R v Spencer [1987] AC 128, [1986] 3 All ER 928 (HL)); (10) excessive length of trial (R v Phung Ung Cau [1995] 2 HKC 665); (11) press commentary unfavourable to the accused which the jury might have read (R v Wood (The Times, 11 July 1995, unreported); and (12) on the facts of the trial, a plea of autrefois would have been successful (R v Tonks [1916] 1 KB 443 (CCA)). When considering whether to order a re-trial, the court may also take account of the fact that the error which brought about the finding that the conviction was unsafe and unsatisfactory was occasioned by the error of the trial judge: R v Yeu Chui Fook [1985] 1 HKC 462. See also Proviso; Verdict. 由於合理行事的陪審團本應有足夠的疑點使上訴人有資格被裁定罪名不成立，而應作廢的裁決。上訴法庭如認為在案件的所有情況下，定罪並不穩妥或並不令人滿意而應予作廢，須判決針對定罪的上訴得直：《刑事訴訟程序條例》（第221章）第83(1)(a)條。曾被認為當中有不穩妥或並不令人滿意定罪判決的案件的例子有：(1) 當出現「潛在的疑點」，指出定罪判決屬不穩妥及不令人滿意（Stafford and Luvaglio v DPP [1974] AC 878, [1973] 3 All ER 762（上議院）; Kwong Kin Hung v R [1997] HKLRD 15, [1996] 3 HKC 698（樞密院））；(2) 超乎適度的司法干預（R v Tam Chi-pang & Ors [1986] HKLR 1122（上訴法庭））；(3) 主審法官於總結詞中向陪審團或於裁決理由中作出不恰當的評論（R v Turnbull [1977] QB 224, [1976] 3 All ER 549（英國上訴法庭））；(4) 陪審團宣布的裁決互相矛盾（HKSAR v Chan Chi-hou （刑事上訴1997年第1號，未經彙報））；(5) 控方未有作出披露（R v Maguire [1992] QB 936, 2 All ER 433（英國上訴法庭））；(6) 法庭未有評核證據（R v Chan Hoi-lung [1988] HKC 162, 2 HKLR 318（英國上訴法庭））； (7) 對目擊證人的證據考慮不足（R v Ho Kwok-man （刑事上訴1985年第526號，未經彙報））； (8) 就佐證未有作出適當的指示（R v Ma Shing（刑事上訴1985年第292號，未經彙報））；(9) 陪審員行為不當或存有偏見（R v Spencer [1987] AC 128, [1986] 3 All ER 928（上議院）；(10) 審訊時間過長（R v Phung Ung Cau [1995] 2 HKC 665）； (11) 報刊評論對被控人不利，而陪審團可能曾經閱讀評論（R v Wood （泰晤士報，1995年7月11日，未經彙報）；及 (12) 基於審訊的事實，曾就同一罪行的答辯本應會得直（R v Tonks [1916] 1 KB 443（英國刑事上訴法庭））。另見 Proviso; Verdict。 |
| 随便看 |
|
法律词典收录了8080条英汉双解法律词条，基本涵盖了常用法律英语单词及短语词组的翻译及用法，是法律学习的有利工具。