香港特別行政區 訴 何偉強

香港特別行政區 訴 何偉強

The application for a certificate was refused because the matters advanced were purely factual credibility and evidential sufficiency issues and did not raise a point of law of great and general importance nor demonstrate substantial and serious unfairness as required by s32(2) CFAO.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] HKCFI 3417
Parties
Respondent: 香港特別行政區; Appellant: 何偉強
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
20 September 2024
Case Number
HCMA375/2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (jurisdictional Application for Permission to Appeal to Court of Final Appeal) / Application for Certificate Under Section 32(2) Cfao; Decision on 20 September 2024
Outcome
Application for certificate under s32(2) refused; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Certificate Under Section 32(2) Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, Assessment of Legal Vs Factual Issues, Judicial Deference to Factual Findings
Source Language
ch
Criminal Law Appeals Procedural Law Leave to Appeal Certificate Under Section 32(2) Court of Final Appeal Ordinance Assessment of Legal Vs Factual Issues Judicial Deference to Factual Findings

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

香港特別行政區

Respondent

何偉強

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (jurisdictional Application for Permission to Appeal to Court of Final Appeal) / Application for Certificate Under Section 32(2) Cfao; Decision on 20 September 2024

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the case raises a point of law of great and general importance under s32(2) of the Court of Final Appeal Ordinance
  2. 2 Whether the appellant demonstrates substantial and serious unfairness warranting certification
  3. 3 Whether factual credibility and sufficiency of evidence grounds can qualify as legal issues for certification

Ratio Decidendi

The application for a certificate was refused because the matters advanced were purely factual credibility and evidential sufficiency issues and did not raise a point of law of great and general importance nor demonstrate substantial and serious unfairness as required by s32(2) CFAO.

Court Disposition

Application for certificate under s32(2) refused; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • Refusal of certificate under section 32(2) of the Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap.484) dated 20 September 2024
  • No order as to costs