| 单词 | Autrefois acquit |
| 释义 | 曾就同一罪行獲裁定無罪 Fr – formerly acquitted. A defence to a charge both at common law and by statute that the accused was previously been acquitted of the same charge on the same facts: Criminal Procedure Ordinance (Cap 221) s 31. An accused should not be placed in double jeopardy for the same offence: R v Tung Chi Hung (1991) 1 HKPLR 282 (DC). An acquittal made by a court of competent jurisdiction and made within its jurisdiction, although erroneous in point of fact, cannot as a rule be questioned and brought before any other court: Vaux’s Case (1590) 4 Co Rep 44a. The acquittal must be on the merits: Haynes v Davis [1915] 1 KB 332 (DC); R v Dabhade [1992] 4 All ER 796, [1993] 96 Cr App Rep 146, 2 WLR 129 (CA). It is a special plea made in answer to a charge and the issue is normally determined by a jury: R v Sheen (1827) 2 C & P 634. Where a second charge different both in substance and in form from an earlier charge is brought, the fact that some of the evidence adduced in the second charge is inconsistent with innocence on the earlier charge does not preclude such evidence from being adduced: R v Yu Wai Shan & Anor [1986] HKLR 550 (CA). See also Autrefois convict; Double jeopardy; Special plea. 法語 – 前經開釋。指在普通法上及藉法規就有關檢控提出的抗辯，即被告以往已就相同的檢控就相同的事實被無罪開釋：《刑事訴訟程序條例》(第221章)第31條。被告不應就相同的罪行被置於同罪兩審的處境中：R v Tung Chi Hung (1991) 1 HKPLR 282 (地方法院)。由具有司法管轄權的法院作出的無罪開釋，以及在其司法管轄權的範圍內作出的無罪開釋，一般不可被質問或被帶到任何其他法院前，但在法律觀點上有錯誤：Vaux’s Case (1590) 4 Co Rep 44a。無罪釋放必須是根據可取的理據：Haynes v Davis [1915] 1 KB 332 (地方法院); R v Dabhade [1992] 4 All ER 796, [1993] 96 Cr App Rep 146, 2 WLR 129 (芵國上訴法院)。屬於就檢控作出回應的特殊答辯，而有關的爭議點通常是由陪審團裁定的：R v Sheen (1827) 2 C & P 634。 如提起的第二檢控與早前的檢控在內容及形式上均不同，則在第二檢控援引的若干證據的事實與早前檢控的無罪不符，並不會阻止援引此等證據：R v Yu Wai Shan & Anor [1986] HKLR 550 (芵國上訴法院)。 另見 Autrefois convict; Double jeopardy; Special plea。 |
| 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。