THE QUEEN v. LIU KAN POR AND OTHERS

THE QUEEN v. LIU KAN POR AND OTHERS

Convictions for forgery against D.1 and D.4 were quashed because the judge's summing up failed adequately to identify and explain the absence of corroborative evidence on the sole contested issue of guilty knowledge, rendering those convictions unsafe; retrial on the forgery counts was ordered. Appeals against possession and sentence for D.1 and appeal and sentence leave for D.3 were dismissed.

Citation
THE QUEEN v. LIU KAN POR AND OTHERS
Parties
Prosecution: THE QUEEN; Defendant/applicant: LIU KAN POR (D.1); Defendant/applicant: LUI MEI LIN (D.3); Defendant/applicant: YICK WAI MING (D.4)
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
25 June 1987
Case Number
CACC83/1987
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Leave to Appeal and Appeals (conviction and Sentence)
Outcome
Court of Appeal quashed forgery convictions of D.1 and D.4 and ordered retrial; dismissed D.1's leave to appeal conviction for possession of forged dies and dismissed his appeal against sentence; dismissed D.3's application for leave to appeal conviction and refused leave to appeal sentence.
Legal Topics
Forgery, Possession of Forged Dies, Accomplice Corroboration, Admissibility of Cautioned Statements, Cross Examination Rights, Retrial
Source Language
EN
Criminal Law Evidence Procedure Forgery Possession of Forged Dies Accomplice Corroboration Admissibility of Cautioned Statements Cross Examination Rights +1 more

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

THE QUEEN

Prosecution

LIU KAN POR (D.1)

Defendant/applicant

LUI MEI LIN (D.3)

Defendant/applicant

YICK WAI MING (D.4)

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Leave to Appeal and Appeals (conviction and Sentence)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether defendants had guilty knowledge
  2. 2 Whether counsel for a co-defendant may cross-examine maker of an inadmissible cautioned statement
  3. 3 Whether jury directions on accomplice corroboration were adequate

Ratio Decidendi

Convictions for forgery against D.1 and D.4 were quashed because the judge's summing up failed adequately to identify and explain the absence of corroborative evidence on the sole contested issue of guilty knowledge, rendering those convictions unsafe; retrial on the forgery counts was ordered. Appeals against possession and sentence for D.1 and appeal and sentence leave for D.3 were dismissed.

Court Disposition

Court of Appeal quashed forgery convictions of D.1 and D.4 and ordered retrial; dismissed D.1's leave to appeal conviction for possession of forged dies and dismissed his appeal against sentence; dismissed D.3's application for leave to appeal conviction and refused leave to appeal sentence.

Orders

  • Convictions for two counts of forgery against LIU Kan Por (D.1) quashed
  • Convictions for two counts of forgery against YICK Wai-ming (D.4) quashed