THE QUEEN v. WONG SHIU LUN

THE QUEEN v. WONG SHIU LUN

The magistrate's decision was flawed by improper criticism of the High Court and failure to apply a Berrada direction and to weigh the High Court acquittal and evidence of deterioration; on review the court exercised its discretion to order a proportionate forfeiture, forfeiting 20% of the seized goods and returning 80%.

Citation
THE QUEEN v. WONG SHIU LUN
Parties
Crown/respondent: The Queen; Appellant/claimant: Wong Shiu Lun
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
26 November 1992
Case Number
HCMA748/1992
Procedural Posture
Magistracy Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal in the High Court (appellate Jurisdiction)
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; forfeiture order varied to a partial (percentage) forfeiture
Legal Topics
Forfeiture, Smuggling, Berrada Direction, Judicial Discretion, Percentage Forfeiture
Source Language
EN
Criminal Law Customs and Excise Procedural Law Forfeiture Smuggling Berrada Direction Judicial Discretion Percentage Forfeiture

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

Parties

The Queen

Crown/respondent

Wong Shiu Lun

Appellant/claimant

Procedural Posture

Magistracy Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal in the High Court (appellate Jurisdiction)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a magistrate properly exercises discretion to order forfeiture after an appellant's acquittal by the High Court
  2. 2 Whether the magistrate was required to give a Berrada direction regarding credibility and propensity
  3. 3 Whether a proportionate (percentage) forfeiture is appropriate given deterioration and evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The magistrate's decision was flawed by improper criticism of the High Court and failure to apply a Berrada direction and to weigh the High Court acquittal and evidence of deterioration; on review the court exercised its discretion to order a proportionate forfeiture, forfeiting 20% of the seized goods and returning 80%.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; forfeiture order varied to a partial (percentage) forfeiture

Orders

  • Order that 20% of the seized unmanifested goods be forfeited to the Crown
  • Order that 80% of the seized unmanifested goods be returned to the claimant