HKSAR v. WONG YING YU and Others

HKSAR v. WONG YING YU and Others

The magistrate was entitled to assess collective conduct over time as disorderly without exhaustive particulars; the Brief Facts was only an opening and did not bind the prosecution; on the video and witness evidence the demonstrators refused repeated warnings and resisted removal, making a breach of the peace likely and attributable to them rather than security; the magistrate's factual findings were open to him and the convictions and fines were upheld.

Citation
HKSAR v. WONG YING YU and Others
Parties
Respondent: HKSAR; 1st Appellant: Wong Ying Yu; 2nd Appellant: Mung Siu Tat; 3rd Appellant: Leung Lik, William; 4th Appellant: Leung King-Chuen; 5th Appellant: Leung Kwok Hung
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
19 September 1997
Case Number
HCMA1082/1996
Procedural Posture
Magistracy Appeal (criminal) / Judgment of Court of First Instance (appeal)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; convictions and fines upheld.
Legal Topics
Disorderly Conduct, Breach of the Peace, Particulars of Charge, Evidence Evaluation, Use of Reasonable Force
Source Language
EN
Public Order Criminal Law Criminal Procedure Trespass Disorderly Conduct Breach of the Peace Particulars of Charge Evidence Evaluation +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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HKSAR

Respondent

Wong Ying Yu

1st Appellant

Mung Siu Tat

2nd Appellant

Leung Lik, William

3rd Appellant

Leung King-Chuen

4th Appellant

Leung Kwok Hung

5th Appellant

Procedural Posture

Magistracy Appeal (criminal) / Judgment of Court of First Instance (appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the charge contained sufficient particulars of the alleged disorderly conduct
  2. 2 Whether the conduct of the appellants was likely to cause a breach of the peace
  3. 3 Whether the breach of the peace was caused by security personnel or by the demonstrators

Ratio Decidendi

The magistrate was entitled to assess collective conduct over time as disorderly without exhaustive particulars; the Brief Facts was only an opening and did not bind the prosecution; on the video and witness evidence the demonstrators refused repeated warnings and resisted removal, making a breach of the peace likely and attributable to them rather than security; the magistrate's factual findings were open to him and the convictions and fines were upheld.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; convictions and fines upheld.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Convictions for disorderly conduct under section 17B(2) of the Public Order Ordinance affirmed