HKSAR v. CHUNG WING MING AND ANOTHER

HKSAR v. CHUNG WING MING AND ANOTHER

The magistrate properly assessed credibility and accepted PW1 and the appellants' cautioned statements; the evidence supports the finding that payments were wages and not loans and that appellants conspired to claim from the Fund; admissibility of cautioned statements was by consent and the retraction did not undermine the findings; appeals dismissed.

Citation
HKSAR v. CHUNG WING MING AND ANOTHER
Parties
Respondent: HKSAR; 1st Appellant: Chung Wing Ming; 2nd Appellant: Chan To Ming
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
21 August 1998
Case Number
HCMA247/1998
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (magistracy Appeal) / Judgment (appeal Hearing)
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Conspiracy to Defraud, Protection of Wages on Insolvency Fund Claims, Admissibility of Cautioned Statements, Appellate Review of Factual Findings, Witness Credibility
Source Language
EN
Criminal Law Employment Law Fraud Procedural Law Conspiracy to Defraud Protection of Wages on Insolvency Fund Claims Admissibility of Cautioned Statements Appellate Review of Factual Findings +1 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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HKSAR

Respondent

Chung Wing Ming

1st Appellant

Chan To Ming

2nd Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (magistracy Appeal) / Judgment (appeal Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was sufficient evidence to support convictions that payments were salaries rather than loans
  2. 2 Reliability and credibility of prosecution witness PW1
  3. 3 Admissibility and voluntariness of the 2nd appellant's cautioned statement given consent at trial

Ratio Decidendi

The magistrate properly assessed credibility and accepted PW1 and the appellants' cautioned statements; the evidence supports the finding that payments were wages and not loans and that appellants conspired to claim from the Fund; admissibility of cautioned statements was by consent and the retraction did not undermine the findings; appeals dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal by 1st Appellant dismissed
  • Appeal by 2nd Appellant dismissed