-8consented, to the act in question. It seems to me that the Legislature was content to rely upon such general provisions to prevent any injustice being caused by the breadth of the definition of misuse of a computer. 17. I would therefore uphold the decision of the judge on paragraph (a). Paragraph (c) 18. The appellant submitted that prosecution based its case before the magistrate solely upon paragraph (a). (Appellant’s case paragraphs 86-87). There was no mention of paragraph (c) and the appellant adduced no evidence upon the question of whether data was added to the bank’s computer or whether he could be said to have intended or been reckless as to whether this would happen. This objection appears to me well founded (see HKSAR v Hau Tung Ying (2011) 14 HKCFAR 453, 470). I therefore consider that reliance upon paragraph (c) would be unjust to the appellant. But for the reasons I have given in relation to paragraph (a), I would dismiss the appeal. Chief Justice Ma: 19. For the above reasons, the appeal is dismissed. (Geoffrey Ma) Chief Justice (Andrew Cheung) Permanent Judge (R A V Ribeiro) Permanent Judge (Joseph Fok) Permanent Judge (Lord Hoffmann) Non-Permanent Judge