HKSAR v. YIP KIM PO AND OTHERS

HKSAR v. YIP KIM PO AND OTHERS

On the totality of documentary, banking, shipping, internal minutes and witness evidence the court concluded beyond reasonable doubt that key defendants (D1,D2,D3) orchestrated and approved sham contracts and false public disclosures and that shell nominee companies (including those controlled by D4, D5 and D6) were used to channel diverted company funds; the combination of the agreed acts, signatures on approvals, payment flows and deliberate steps to conceal origins and recipients established conspiracy to defraud and to deal with proceeds, theft where applicable, and computer misuse where emails were sent dishonestly.

Citation
HKSAR v. YIP KIM PO AND OTHERS
Parties
Prosecution: HKSAR; Defendant (d1): YIP KIM PO; Defendant (d2): YIP WAN FUNG aka YIP KIM FUNG; Defendant (d3): YIP WAI LUN; Defendant (d4): SIU KIN FUNG KEITH; Defendant (d5): LAU HOK MAN; Defendant (d6): TSUI PUI SZE
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
16 September 2010
Case Number
DCCC960/2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Verdict (reasons for Verdict Issued)
Outcome
Court convicted defendants on multiple counts: finding that D1, D2 and D3 conspired to defraud OGD and Hing Yip and published and caused false disclosures; D3 convicted of computer access offences; D3 and D4 convicted for conspiracy to deal with proceeds; D4 convicted of theft of specific sums; D5 and D6 convicted...
Legal Topics
Conspiracy to Defraud, Conspiracy to Deal With Proceeds of Indictable Offence, Theft, False Statements by Company Directors, Accessing a Computer With Dishonest Intent, Corporate Disclosure/listing Rules, Bank Account Nominee Use
Source Language
EN
Criminal Law Corporate and Securities Law Financial Crime Money Laundering Computer Misuse Conspiracy to Defraud Conspiracy to Deal With Proceeds of Indictable Offence Theft +4 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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HKSAR

Prosecution

YIP KIM PO

Defendant (d1)

YIP WAN FUNG aka YIP KIM FUNG

Defendant (d2)

YIP WAI LUN

Defendant (d3)

SIU KIN FUNG KEITH

Defendant (d4)

LAU HOK MAN

Defendant (d5)

TSUI PUI SZE

Defendant (d6)

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Verdict (reasons for Verdict Issued)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the OGD/Greatson contract was a sham and defendants conspired to defraud OGD and Hing Yip
  2. 2 Whether public announcement and circular were false/misleading and published with intent to deceive shareholders/creditors
  3. 3 Whether nominees and shell companies were used to deal with proceeds of indictable offences

Ratio Decidendi

On the totality of documentary, banking, shipping, internal minutes and witness evidence the court concluded beyond reasonable doubt that key defendants (D1,D2,D3) orchestrated and approved sham contracts and false public disclosures and that shell nominee companies (including those controlled by D4, D5 and D6) were used to channel diverted company funds; the combination of the agreed acts, signatures on approvals, payment flows and deliberate steps to conceal origins and recipients established conspiracy to defraud and to deal with proceeds, theft where applicable, and computer misuse where emails were sent dishonestly.

Court Disposition

Court convicted defendants on multiple counts: finding that D1, D2 and D3 conspired to defraud OGD and Hing Yip and published and caused false disclosures; D3 convicted of computer access offences; D3 and D4 convicted for conspiracy to deal with proceeds; D4 convicted of theft of specific sums; D5 and D6 convicted...

Orders

  • Reasons for verdict issued on 16 September 2010 (verdict delivered)
  • Sentencing to follow at schedule determined by court (no sentencing order contained in reasons)