HKSAR v. LEE WAI KI, JEREMY AND OTHERS

HKSAR v. LEE WAI KI, JEREMY AND OTHERS

The court upheld the magistrate's findings that the interviews established a tacit agreement to make and mislabel surplus test cubes, that the conduct was dishonest by ordinary standards and within the scope of intent to defraud as defined in authorities, and that the magistrate was entitled to infer agreement and dishonesty from the evidence; therefore convictions are safe and appeals dismissed.

Citation
HKSAR v. LEE WAI KI, JEREMY AND OTHERS
Parties
Respondent: HKSAR; 1st Appellant: Lee Wai-Ki, Jeremy; 2nd Appellant: Chan Chi-Hung, Chris; 3rd Appellant: Choi Kim-Kwan
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
20 June 2001
Case Number
HCMA1045/2000
Procedural Posture
Criminal Magistracy Appeal (conspiracy to Defraud) / Appeal Against Conviction to Court of First Instance
Outcome
Appeals dismissed; convictions and sentences upheld
Legal Topics
Conspiracy to Defraud, Dishonesty (ghosh Test), Mens Rea, Proof of Agreement by Inference, Admission Evidence Under S.65 C CPO
Source Language
EN
Criminal Law Evidence Procedure Conspiracy to Defraud Dishonesty (ghosh Test) Mens Rea Proof of Agreement by Inference Admission Evidence Under S.65 C CPO

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

Parties

HKSAR

Respondent

Lee Wai-Ki, Jeremy

1st Appellant

Chan Chi-Hung, Chris

2nd Appellant

Choi Kim-Kwan

3rd Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Magistracy Appeal (conspiracy to Defraud) / Appeal Against Conviction to Court of First Instance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was sufficient evidence of an agreement to constitute conspiracy
  2. 2 Whether appellants acted dishonestly under the Ghosh test
  3. 3 Whether appellants intended to defraud or to prejudice employer's rights

Ratio Decidendi

The court upheld the magistrate's findings that the interviews established a tacit agreement to make and mislabel surplus test cubes, that the conduct was dishonest by ordinary standards and within the scope of intent to defraud as defined in authorities, and that the magistrate was entitled to infer agreement and dishonesty from the evidence; therefore convictions are safe and appeals dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed; convictions and sentences upheld

Orders

  • Conviction of conspiracy to defraud upheld for 1st, 2nd and 3rd Appellants
  • 1st Appellant fined 10000 HKD