R. v. CHAN LAP MAN, RAYMOND and Others

R. v. CHAN LAP MAN, RAYMOND and Others

The court held that (1) conspiracy to steal can be an alternative to conspiracy to rob under s.51(2) CPO only where the evidence proves one and the same conspiracy and its nature supports the alternative; (2) the Crown's offering no further evidence against two defendants and their acquittal did not of itself...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
R. v. CHAN LAP MAN, RAYMOND and Others
Parties
Prosecution: The Queen; Defendant: Chan Lap Man, Raymond; Defendant: Ho Ming-yeung; Defendant: Luk Kan-hung; Defendant: Unnamed 4th Defendant; Defendant: Unnamed 5th Defendant
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
16 October 1996
Case Number
HCCC373/1995
Procedural Posture
Criminal (conspiracy to Rob) / Criminal Trial (jury); Voir Dires Concluded; Mid Trial; Jury Discharged; Retrial of Remaining Defendants Ordered
Outcome
Application for stay (abuse of process) dismissed; Crown not permitted to resile from prior representations where defence had relied to its detriment; jury discharged (as ordered) and retrial to proceed against remaining defendants
Legal Topics
Conspiracy, Alternative Offence Under S.51(2) CPO, Cautioned Statements, Abuse of Process, Amendment to Indictment, Prosecutorial Representations
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Evidence Criminal Procedure Prosecutorial Conduct Conspiracy Alternative Offence Under S.51(2) CPO Cautioned Statements Abuse of Process +2 more

Source-derived case record

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Queen

Prosecution

Chan Lap Man, Raymond

Defendant

Ho Ming-yeung

Defendant

Luk Kan-hung

Defendant

Unnamed 4th Defendant

Defendant

Unnamed 5th Defendant

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal (conspiracy to Rob) / Criminal Trial (jury); Voir Dires Concluded; Mid Trial; Jury Discharged; Retrial of Remaining Defendants Ordered

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether conspiracy to steal is an alternative offence to conspiracy to rob under s.51(2) CPO when evidence points to one single conspiracy
  2. 2 Whether offering no further evidence against some defendants and their acquittal prejudices remaining defendants or creates a justifiable sense of grievance
  3. 3 Whether the prosecution continuing against remaining defendants after dropping others amounted to an abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that (1) conspiracy to steal can be an alternative to conspiracy to rob under s.51(2) CPO only where the evidence proves one and the same conspiracy and its nature supports the alternative; (2) the Crown's offering no further evidence against two defendants and their acquittal did not of itself prejudice the remaining defendants nor constitute an abuse of process where the acquitted defendants were members of a distinct conspiracy; (3) the Crown may be bound by prior representations if the defence relied to its detriment and the court may prevent the Crown from reneging on such representations; and (4) there is no general legal requirement to name identifiable non‑present...

Court Disposition

Application for stay (abuse of process) dismissed; Crown not permitted to resile from prior representations where defence had relied to its detriment; jury discharged (as ordered) and retrial to proceed against remaining defendants

Orders

  • Verdict of not guilty recorded and D2 and D3 acquitted
  • Current jury discharged