HKSAR v. LAM CHUN WING GRAY

HKSAR v. LAM CHUN WING GRAY

Mr Hung is not qualified to give expert opinion on the methods of administration, unit dosages and effects of the drug because his formal chemistry qualifications do not pertain to the subject, his experience is limited to drug analysis not addict behaviour, his reliance on sparse overseas literature lacks demonstrated relevance to Hong Kong, and the Government Laboratory records are not a reliable epidemiological basis; therefore his proposed evidence as an expert is excluded.

Citation
HKSAR v. LAM CHUN WING GRAY
Parties
Prosecution: HKSAR; Accused: LAM CHUN WING, GRAY
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
6 May 1999
Case Number
HCCC333/1998
Procedural Posture
Criminal Court of First Instance / Preliminary Ruling on Admissibility of Expert Evidence
Outcome
Proposed expert witness Mr Hung rejected and excluded from giving expert evidence in this case
Legal Topics
Expert Evidence, Admissibility, Forensic Evidence, Qualification of Expert Witnesses
Source Language
EN
Criminal Law Evidence Expert Evidence Admissibility Forensic Evidence Qualification of Expert Witnesses

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HKSAR

Prosecution

LAM CHUN WING, GRAY

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Court of First Instance / Preliminary Ruling on Admissibility of Expert Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr Hung is qualified to give expert evidence on methods of administration, unit dosages and effects of the drug
  2. 2 Whether overseas literature and internal laboratory records provide a reliable and relevant basis for expert opinion applicable to Hong Kong
  3. 3 Whether presentation of laboratory records by an employee constitutes expert evidence

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Hung is not qualified to give expert opinion on the methods of administration, unit dosages and effects of the drug because his formal chemistry qualifications do not pertain to the subject, his experience is limited to drug analysis not addict behaviour, his reliance on sparse overseas literature lacks demonstrated relevance to Hong Kong, and the Government Laboratory records are not a reliable epidemiological basis; therefore his proposed evidence as an expert is excluded.

Court Disposition

Proposed expert witness Mr Hung rejected and excluded from giving expert evidence in this case

Orders

  • Mr Hung shall not give evidence as an expert on methods of administration, unit dosages or effects of the drug; such expert evidence is excluded for the purposes of this case