HKSAR v. CHAN YIU SHING AND OTHERS

HKSAR v. CHAN YIU SHING AND OTHERS

The court held that the proposed second re-amendments were not amendments of substance, caused no prejudice or injustice to the defendants, corrected the indictment to reflect evidence and statutory language, and that joinder of the conspiracy and substantive possession counts was justified; accordingly the second re-amendments were granted.

Citation
[2018] HKCFI 305
Parties
Prosecution: HKSAR; Defendant: CHAN Yiu-shing; Defendant: CHENG Wai-shing; Defendant: PENNELLI Rizzy; Defendant: WU Kai-fu; Defendant: MAN Ting-lock
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
7 February 2017
Case Number
HCCC41/2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Pre Trial Amendment Hearing
Outcome
Application to re-amend the indictment granted; second re-amendments allowed
Legal Topics
Amendment of Indictment, Joinder and Severance, Possession of Explosive Substances, Conspiracy
Source Language
EN
Criminal Law Procedural Law Statutory Interpretation Amendment of Indictment Joinder and Severance Possession of Explosive Substances Conspiracy

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

Parties

HKSAR

Prosecution

CHAN Yiu-shing

Defendant

CHENG Wai-shing

Defendant

PENNELLI Rizzy

Defendant

WU Kai-fu

Defendant

MAN Ting-lock

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Pre Trial Amendment Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proposed amendments to the indictment were amendments of substance requiring a fresh consent to prosecute
  2. 2 Whether the amendments caused prejudice to the defendants or changed the subject matter of the charges
  3. 3 Whether joinder of the conspiracy count with substantive possession counts was justified

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the proposed second re-amendments were not amendments of substance, caused no prejudice or injustice to the defendants, corrected the indictment to reflect evidence and statutory language, and that joinder of the conspiracy and substantive possession counts was justified; accordingly the second re-amendments were granted.

Court Disposition

Application to re-amend the indictment granted; second re-amendments allowed

Orders

  • Second re-amendments to the Amended Indictment granted
  • Possession counts amended to read 'in his possession or custody or under his control' to follow statutory language