RE LI SAI CHUNG

HCMP000548/1977

IN THE SUPREME COURT
Miscellaneous Proceedings
1977 No. 548
(Criminal)

—————–

IN THE MATTER of Li Sai Chung and Siu Nin
and
IN THE MATTER of Victoria District Court Criminal Case No.151 of 1977
and
IN THE MATTER of A Writ of Habeas Corpus Ad Subjiciendum

—————–

Coram: Huggins, Ag. C.J.

Date of Judgment: 30th August, 1977.

—————–

JUDGMENT

—————–

1. This is an application for “an order permitting this application for a writ of habeas corpus to be served”, the avowed purpose ofthe application being to obtain bail for a person who stands charged in the District Court. Bail having been refused by the DistrictJudge, a further application was made to a judge of the High Court and was refused. Unfortunately the provisions of the English O.79r.9 were omitted from our Rules of the Supreme Court and there appears to be no objection in law to the making of a further application.

2. However, O.54 r.1 is explicit and in my view I have no jurisdiction to hear the application in chambers. No enquiry was made as towhether a Full Bench could conveniently be convened for the purpose of the application and I am informed that a full bench will infact be sitting at 2.30 p.m. tomorrow. Even if no Full Bench had been available, I think the application should have been made toa single judge in court. The terms of our Order are different from those of the English Order, which deals specifically with applicationsin vacation. There have been single judges sitting to dispose of criminal business throughout today and I was informed last weekof the desire to make this application, so that the matter is not one of such urgency that it requires to be heard outside the normalhours of sitting.

3. The application ought, as it seems to me, to be for an order to show cause why an order nisi for a writ of habeas corpus should notissue.

30th August, 1977.

Representation: