HKSAR v. CHEN KEEN (alias JACK CHEN) AND OTHERS

HKSAR v. CHEN KEEN (alias JACK CHEN) AND OTHERS

Court directed reasonable overseas enquiries of Mr King and the NZ liquidators for disclosure; allowed prosecution to adduce evidence of pre-existing business relationships (including matters linked to GFIG and Super Worth) as circumstantial evidence of cooperation but prohibited any case theory that the 1st Accused had a legal duty to disclose those past dealings or that non-disclosure alone establishes dishonesty; allowed evidence about pressure to convert convertible notes but excluded witness opinion (PW2 Yip) about the accused's motives; held that evidence of Dynasty Group liquidation and suggestion that 2nd Accused left NZ to avoid liquidators is inadmissible or overly prejudicial...

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 3546
Parties
Prosecution: HKSAR; 1st Accused: CHEN KEEN (alias JACK CHEN); 2nd Accused: HAO MAY (formerly WANG MAY YAN; alias MAY WANG); 3rd Accused: YEE WENJIE (also known as YU WENJIE; alias ERIC YEE)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
25 November 2021
Case Number
HCCC309/2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Fraud and Proceeds of Crime (retrial) / Pre Trial Applications and Rulings on Admissibility and Disclosure (before Arraignment)
Outcome
Pre-trial rulings made on admissibility and disclosure as summarised; directions given to prosecution and limits imposed on evidence and opening
Legal Topics
Disclosure Obligations, Admissibility of Documentary Evidence, Expert/opinion Evidence, Listing Rules (hkex), Conspiracy to Defraud, Documentary Hearsay, Prosecutorial Opening Address
Source Language
EN
Criminal Law Evidence Securities Law Company Law Procedure Disclosure Obligations Admissibility of Documentary Evidence Expert/opinion Evidence +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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HKSAR

Prosecution

CHEN KEEN (alias JACK CHEN)

1st Accused

HAO MAY (formerly WANG MAY YAN; alias MAY WANG)

2nd Accused

YEE WENJIE (also known as YU WENJIE; alias ERIC YEE)

3rd Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Fraud and Proceeds of Crime (retrial) / Pre Trial Applications and Rulings on Admissibility and Disclosure (before Arraignment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Disclosure obligations and overseas enquiries (accounts held by Wilshire, King, liquidators)
  2. 2 Admissibility of evidence about prior GFIG shareholding and pre-existing business relationship
  3. 3 Admissibility of evidence about conversion of convertible notes and post-alleged-conspiracy conduct

Ratio Decidendi

Court directed reasonable overseas enquiries of Mr King and the NZ liquidators for disclosure; allowed prosecution to adduce evidence of pre-existing business relationships (including matters linked to GFIG and Super Worth) as circumstantial evidence of cooperation but prohibited any case theory that the 1st Accused had a legal duty to disclose those past dealings or that non-disclosure alone establishes dishonesty; allowed evidence about pressure to convert convertible notes but excluded witness opinion (PW2 Yip) about the accused's motives; held that evidence of Dynasty Group liquidation and suggestion that 2nd Accused left NZ to avoid liquidators is inadmissible or overly prejudicial...

Court Disposition

Pre-trial rulings made on admissibility and disclosure as summarised; directions given to prosecution and limits imposed on evidence and opening

Orders

  • Prosecution to make enquiries of Mark Stuart King and the New Zealand liquidators and disclose any relevant material identified
  • Prosecution permitted to adduce evidence of prior business relationship (including GFIG and Super Worth) as circumstantial evidence but prohibited from asserting any legal duty on the 1st Accused to disclose those dealings or inviting an adverse inference solely from non-disclosure