HKSAR v. NG WAI LOK

HKSAR v. NG WAI LOK

The magistrate's findings that the appellant intentionally committed an indecent assault and that the accused's explanation of accidental touching was rejected were supported by the evidence and transcript; she had addressed the intention/indecency element adequately and there was no sufficient basis to regard the conviction as unsafe; appeal dismissed.

Citation
HKSAR v. NG WAI LOK
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Appellant; Respondent (prosecution): Respondent; Complainant: PW1 (complainant); Witness: PW2 (bus driver)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
13 February 2004
Case Number
HCMA1172/2003
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (indecent Assault) / Appeal to High Court Against Conviction From Magistrates' Court; Determination and Dismissal of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed
Legal Topics
Indecent Assault, Appeal Against Conviction, Credibility and Demeanour, Intention Element, Corroboration Requirement
Source Language
EN
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Evidence Indecent Assault Appeal Against Conviction Credibility and Demeanour Intention Element Corroboration Requirement

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Appellant

Appellant/defendant

Respondent

Respondent (prosecution)

PW1 (complainant)

Complainant

PW2 (bus driver)

Witness

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (indecent Assault) / Appeal to High Court Against Conviction From Magistrates' Court; Determination and Dismissal of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the magistrate erred in allowing or failing to discount evidence elicited by leading questions
  2. 2 Whether the touching was accidental or intentional
  3. 3 Whether the touching was of an indecent nature (intention to commit an indecent assault)

Ratio Decidendi

The magistrate's findings that the appellant intentionally committed an indecent assault and that the accused's explanation of accidental touching was rejected were supported by the evidence and transcript; she had addressed the intention/indecency element adequately and there was no sufficient basis to regard the conviction as unsafe; appeal dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Conviction for indecent assault (section 122(1), Crimes Ordinance) upheld