Section 158: Ratio in Sip Heng Wong Ng and Ng Ping Man v R—The provisions of
consolidated text (as at 2017). juris shows the text as it was consolidated; it does not confirm that this is the law in force today.
158. Ratio in Sip Heng Wong Ng and Ng Ping Man v R—The provisions of
section 10 (1) and (8) of the Constitution were such that the same principle
applies to civil and criminal cases, and even in a civil suit the parties, or their
legal advisers could not waive the right to a fair trial by agreeing that a Magistrate who had not heard all the evidence should deliver judgment.
However, a strict adherence to a total ban on a Magistrate continuing a
hearing will, in the local context, cause much inconvenience, not least to the
litigants running the risk of being penalised by justice delayed. This was not
done for the notion of a fair trial to yield to administrative convenience but to
say that, having regard to all the circumstances, it could be reasonable to
hold that, in determining on appeal whether a trial had been fair, one should
consider what was the part of the evidence which had not been heard by the
Magistrate who delivered judgment. Ramchurn v Lamour (1988).
CON – 207 [Issue 1]
The Constitution