Hong Kong Case Law

律政司司長 訴 戴嘉正及另一人

Court

Court of First Instance

Case number

HCMA262/2024

The appellate court found the magistrate misinterpreted PW14's evidence and undervalued the cumulative probative force of the CCTV footage together with time‑stamped WhatsApp messages and photos; that combined evidence made the identification of D3 and D4 the only reasonable conclusion and the magistrate's acquittals were therefore perverse. The appeal was allowed and the matter remitted to the magistrate for further proceedings in accordance with the appellate court's observations, including consideration of joint‑enterprise liability if appropriate.

Source excerpt

• Identification evidence
• Cctv evidence
• Whatsapp evidence
• Hearsay/documentary inference
• Magistrate's verdict review
• Perverse verdict

Read case analysis

香港特別行政區 訴 呂偉龍

Court

Court of First Instance

Case number

HCMA539/2019

The court upheld the conviction: the trial judge properly found the child complainant credible and the identification reliable based on multiple encounters and a reliable recognition procedure; the touching was deliberate not accidental; although the judge erred in attributing the October incident to the appellant, that error was immaterial to the safety of the conviction because the identification from the November/December encounter and the February incident together proved identity beyond reasonable doubt, and the judge applied Turnbull caution appropriately.

Source excerpt

• Child sexual assault
• Identification evidence
• Credibility assessment
• Turnbull guidelines

Read case analysis

香港特別行政區 訴 余文龍

Court

District Court

Case number

DCCC818/2019

The identification evidence (CCTV and eyewitness identification) was of poor quality and inherently weak, and there was no other evidence to support the identifications; accordingly the prosecution evidence taken at its highest was insufficient for a properly directed jury to convict, so the judge must stop the case and find no case to answer.

Source excerpt

• Burglary
• No case to answer
• Identification evidence
• Turnbull guidelines
• Galbraith test

Read case analysis

HKSAR v. SUNAR KAMAL

Court

Court of First Instance

Case number

HCMA415/2011

The High Court dismissed a magistracy appeal against an indecent assault conviction, holding that the complainant was reliable and discrepancies with another witness were immaterial.

• Indecent assault
• Identification evidence
• Witness credibility
• Appeal against conviction
• Evaluation of inconsistencies
• Indecent-assault

Read case analysis

HKSAR v. CHAN CHI KEUNG

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

CACC457/2010

The Court of Appeal dismissed leave to appeal against a robbery conviction, holding the evidence supported theft and reliable identification of the applicant.

• Robbery
• Mistaken identity
• Witness credibility
• Appeal against conviction
• Evaluation of defence
• Mistaken-identity

Read case analysis

HKSAR v. KHAN TARIQ

Court

Court of First Instance

Case number

HCMA192/2009

Magistracy appeal dismissed after the High Court upheld convictions for two counts of indecent assault, finding the identification and consent findings were supported by the evidence.

• Indecent assault
• Identification evidence
• Consent
• Appeal against conviction
• Indecent-assault
• Identification-evidence

Read case analysis

HKSAR v. BELOMO BIDJO LEON AND ANOTHER

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

CACC501/2005

The Court of Appeal refused leave to appeal against robbery convictions, finding the complainant credible, the identifications reliable, and no merit in complaints about counsel.

• Robbery
• Identification evidence
• Ineffective assistance of counsel
• Leave to appeal
• Loss of time order
• Criminal-appeal

Read case analysis

HKSAR v. LIMBU RISESH

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

CACC489/2006

The Court of Appeal held that the identification evidence was too unreliable to leave to the jury, allowed the appeal, quashed the convictions, and ordered the appellant discharged.

• Visual identification
• Turnbull guidelines
• No case to answer
• Misidentification
• Jury directions
• Visual-identification

Read case analysis

HKSAR v. LAU KWOKYIU

Court

Court of First Instance

Case number

HCMA216/2004

Hong Kong criminal appeal dismissed. The court upheld the conviction for two counts of theft and found the 30-month total sentence not manifestly excessive.

• Shop theft
• Witness identification
• Sentence starting point
• Totality principle
• Previous convictions
• Theft

Read case analysis

HKSAR v. CHAN PAK HANG

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

CACC18/2003

Court of Appeal allowed a robbery appeal, holding the conviction unsafe where the trial judge treated the defence as merely implausible while doubting key prosecution identification evidence.

• Robbery
• Identification parade
• Credibility assessment
• Burden and standard of proof
• Leave to appeal
• Quashing conviction

Read case analysis