HKSAR v. TSE KAI CHEONG

HKSAR v. TSE KAI CHEONG

The magistrate's credibility findings that Lam, Wong and Kong did not enter into the so‑called additional contracts and did not receive payments were reasonable and supported by the evidence; the prosecution proved each element of the offences under s9(3) POBO and s73 Crimes Ordinance beyond reasonable doubt; the appellate court will not disturb the magistrate's factual findings and assessment of witness credibility on the material before it, and therefore the appeal was dismissed.

Citation
HKSAR v. TSE KAI CHEONG
Parties
Respondent: HKSAR; Appellant: Tse Kai Cheong
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
25 May 2012
Case Number
HCMA791/2011
Procedural Posture
Magistracy Appeal (court of First Instance on Appeal From KCCC No.2112 of 2011) / Judgment (reasons for Judgment Delivered)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; convictions and sentence upheld
Legal Topics
Agent Using Document to Deceive Principal, Use of False Instrument, Witness Credibility, Appellate Review of Factual Findings, Conviction Appeal
Source Language
EN
Criminal Law Anti‑corruption Law Commercial Law Agent Using Document to Deceive Principal Use of False Instrument Witness Credibility Appellate Review of Factual Findings Conviction Appeal

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HKSAR

Respondent

Tse Kai Cheong

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Magistracy Appeal (court of First Instance on Appeal From KCCC No.2112 of 2011) / Judgment (reasons for Judgment Delivered)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant, as agent/director, used documents with intent to deceive his principal (AAL) contrary to s9(3) Prevention of Bribery Ordinance
  2. 2 Whether photocopied signed cheques were false instruments used with intent contrary to s73 Crimes Ordinance
  3. 3 Whether the magistrate erred in assessing credibility of key prosecution witnesses (Lam, Wong, Kong) such that the convictions should be overturned

Ratio Decidendi

The magistrate's credibility findings that Lam, Wong and Kong did not enter into the so‑called additional contracts and did not receive payments were reasonable and supported by the evidence; the prosecution proved each element of the offences under s9(3) POBO and s73 Crimes Ordinance beyond reasonable doubt; the appellate court will not disturb the magistrate's factual findings and assessment of witness credibility on the material before it, and therefore the appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; convictions and sentence upheld

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and convictions and sentences affirmed