香港特別行政區 訴 李麗珍

香港特別行政區 訴 李麗珍

The judge refused costs because, objectively, the second defendant's role as authorised signatory, involvement in transfers totaling US$83,726,597.73 despite declared modest income, and conduct in processing transfers and participating in the payment group amounted to bringing suspicion on herself and led the prosecution to believe the evidence was stronger than it was; therefore the court exercised its discretion to refuse costs.

Citation
[2023] HKDC 1746
Parties
Prosecution: 香港特別行政區; Second Defendant: 李麗珍
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
2 December 2023
Case Number
DCCC646/2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Money Laundering/conspiracy / Post‑trial Costs Application Following Acquittal
Outcome
Costs application refused
Legal Topics
Conspiracy to Deal With Proceeds of Crime, Costs on Acquittal, Self‑suspicion Doctrine
Source Language
CH
Criminal Law Anti‑money Laundering Procedure Costs Conspiracy to Deal With Proceeds of Crime Costs on Acquittal Self‑suspicion Doctrine

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 1 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

香港特別行政區

Prosecution

李麗珍

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Money Laundering/conspiracy / Post‑trial Costs Application Following Acquittal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an acquitted defendant is entitled to costs
  2. 2 Whether the defendant's conduct amounted to bringing suspicion on herself such that costs should be refused
  3. 3 Whether pre‑investigation conduct can be considered in costs discretion

Ratio Decidendi

The judge refused costs because, objectively, the second defendant's role as authorised signatory, involvement in transfers totaling US$83,726,597.73 despite declared modest income, and conduct in processing transfers and participating in the payment group amounted to bringing suspicion on herself and led the prosecution to believe the evidence was stronger than it was; therefore the court exercised its discretion to refuse costs.

Court Disposition

Costs application refused

Orders

  • Second defendant's application for costs is refused