JUDGMENT

Lord Bridge of Harwich J:

This is a petition for special leave to appeal against a decision of the Court of Appeal of Hong Kong dismissing an appeal from a decision of Chief Justice Yang who refused an application by the petitioner for an order of habeas corpus following his committal to custody pursuant to the Fugitive Offenders (Hong Kong) Order 1967 in respect of offences which he is alleged to have committed in Australia.

It is exceptional for their Lordships to deliver a reasoned judgment in disposing of a petition for leave to appeal, but it is desirable to do so in this case because the law requires clarification.

The facts do not matter. The sole issue is this. The Magistrate who heard the proceedings, whereby the Government of Australia sought the return of this petitioner under the Fugitive Offenders (Hong Kong) Order, concluded on the totality of the evidence that there was a prima facie case which was sufficient to warrant committing him in custody. The question raised is whether, having reached that conclusion, he was right to make the order on the footing that the appropriate standard of proof which the evidence is required to attain is that of a prima facie case