HKSAR v. LEE CHI HUNG

HKSAR v. LEE CHI HUNG

The court ruled that under section 22 of the Evidence Ordinance a transcript of the witness's prior voir dire evidence can be admitted where the witness cannot be found and all reasonable steps to locate her have been taken; section 22(2) does not automatically exclude such a transcript in these circumstances and admission is permitted subject to the defence proving adequacy of search steps and the court directing the jury on the weight of the transcript under section 22B.

Citation
HKSAR v. LEE CHI HUNG
Parties
Accused: Lee Chi-hung; Prosecution: HKSAR; Witness: Madam Chan Sau-lai; Judge: Deputy Judge Gill
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
20 July 2000
Case Number
HCCC411/1999
Procedural Posture
Criminal Robbery / Retrial: Post Defence Evidence; Application to Admit Transcript of Prior Voir Dire Evidence
Outcome
Defence application to admit the transcript of Madam Chan's prior voir dire evidence granted in principle subject to proof that all reasonable steps have been taken to find the witness; court to receive evidence on adequacy of search and, if satisfied, allow transcript with jury directions on weight under section 22B.
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Prior Trial Transcript, Hearsay and Documentary Evidence, Witness Unavailability and Steps to Locate, Statutory Interpretation of Evidence Ordinance S22 and S22 B, Jury Directions and Weight of Evidence
Source Language
EN
Evidence Criminal Law Trial Procedure Admissibility of Prior Trial Transcript Hearsay and Documentary Evidence Witness Unavailability and Steps to Locate Statutory Interpretation of Evidence Ordinance S22 and S22 B Jury Directions and Weight of Evidence

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lee Chi-hung

Accused

HKSAR

Prosecution

Madam Chan Sau-lai

Witness

Deputy Judge Gill

Judge

Procedural Posture

Criminal Robbery / Retrial: Post Defence Evidence; Application to Admit Transcript of Prior Voir Dire Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a transcript of a witness's evidence from a prior trial may be admitted under section 22 of the Evidence Ordinance when the witness cannot be found
  2. 2 Whether section 22(2) excludes transcripts prepared in connection with criminal proceedings
  3. 3 Whether the prosecution may challenge adequacy of steps taken to locate a missing witness before admission

Ratio Decidendi

The court ruled that under section 22 of the Evidence Ordinance a transcript of the witness's prior voir dire evidence can be admitted where the witness cannot be found and all reasonable steps to locate her have been taken; section 22(2) does not automatically exclude such a transcript in these circumstances and admission is permitted subject to the defence proving adequacy of search steps and the court directing the jury on the weight of the transcript under section 22B.

Court Disposition

Defence application to admit the transcript of Madam Chan's prior voir dire evidence granted in principle subject to proof that all reasonable steps have been taken to find the witness; court to receive evidence on adequacy of search and, if satisfied, allow transcript with jury directions on weight under section 22B.

Orders

  • Application to admit transcript granted in principle
  • Defence to call evidence establishing that all reasonable steps have been taken to locate Madam Chan