HKSAR v. PANG BYRON

HKSAR v. PANG BYRON

The appellate court concluded the magistrate properly directed himself on the elements of s73, fairly assessed the evidence and witness credibility (in particular accepting Dr Tsang\'s evidence and computer records), and was entitled to find the EER was false, that the appellant used it knowing it was false with intent to induce staff; accordingly the conviction was safe and the appeal failed.

Citation
HKSAR v. PANG BYRON
Parties
Appellant: Pang Byron; Respondent: HKSAR
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
3 May 2013
Case Number
HCMA425/2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Appeal Against Conviction From Magistrate Court
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed; conviction upheld.
Legal Topics
Using a False Instrument, Forgery of Medical Report, Handwriting/forensic Evidence, Credibility Assessment, Appeal Review
Source Language
EN
Criminal Law Evidence Forgery Using a False Instrument Forgery of Medical Report Handwriting/forensic Evidence Credibility Assessment Appeal Review

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

Parties

Pang Byron

Appellant

HKSAR

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Appeal Against Conviction From Magistrate Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the document (EER dated 3 March 2011) was a false instrument
  2. 2 Whether the appellant used that instrument and knew it was false
  3. 3 Whether the appellant intended to induce Marine Department staff to accept it as genuine and cause action or inaction to his or another's prejudice

Ratio Decidendi

The appellate court concluded the magistrate properly directed himself on the elements of s73, fairly assessed the evidence and witness credibility (in particular accepting Dr Tsang\'s evidence and computer records), and was entitled to find the EER was false, that the appellant used it knowing it was false with intent to induce staff; accordingly the conviction was safe and the appeal failed.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed; conviction upheld.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal dismissed
  • Conviction affirmed