Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Hong Kong decisions
Decisions matching the current search
On a full re‑hearing of the evidence the court agreed with the trial judge's detailed credibility findings, concluded the prosecution proved the offence of fighting in a public place beyond reasonable doubt, rejected the appellant's self‑defence claim as unreasonable and retaliatory, and therefore dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction.
Source excerpt
Appellate court found the original sentencing starting points were excessive given the totality of evidence and applicable sentencing methodology; it revised the starting points (count 1 to 12 months, count 2 to 15 months), applied the appropriate reductions for plea and limited mitigation for self‑surrender and adjusted for repeat offending, ordered counts 1 and 2 to run concurrently (operative concurrent term 8 months) with partial concurrency for counts 3 and 4, and reduced the aggregate sentence from 13 months to 10 months while maintaining disqualification periods and the fine.
Source excerpt
The court accepted the prosecution witness's contemporaneous, consistent and credible observations that the appellant displayed and sold lanterns occupying about 0.8 sqm in a crowded public place causing pedestrians to detour; the appellant's account was rejected as inherently implausible and internally inconsistent; the application to admit fresh photographic evidence was refused for lack of provenance and explanation; on rehearing the Crown proved both offences beyond reasonable doubt, so convictions and fines were upheld.
Source excerpt
Court of Appeal refused leave to appeal against convictions for riot and conspiracy to wound with intent, holding the trial judge applied the law correctly and the grounds were not arguable.
The application is refused because the applicant failed to identify any point of law of great and general importance and the matter is a factual determination not involving the legal question required by s32(2).
Source excerpt
Magistracy appeal dismissed. The court held that offensive weapons found in the appellant’s vehicle were immediately accessible and in his possession despite no forensic evidence.
The High Court allowed a sentence appeal in part, crediting additional custody periods and varying a five-month sentence to time served, with immediate release ordered.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the prosecution's case‑stated appeal and upheld the acquittal of D6 because, although the trial judge's exposition of authority was imperfect, the acquittal relied on permissible factual findings and was not perverse; the court refused leave and dismissed D10's appeal because the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the laser pointer and multitool were possessed with intent to be used as offensive weapons given the circumstances and inferences available to the trial judge.
Source excerpt
On re‑hearing and after viewing the body‑worn camera footage, the court was not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant 'did not comply' with the police request to produce identity for inspection under Public Order Ordinance s49(1), because she located and displayed her identity card within about one minute and placed it on a low wall within approximately one metre where police retrieved it shortly thereafter; evidence was therefore insufficient to uphold the conviction and it was quashed.
Source excerpt
法院根據既有上訴庭量刑參考，為各項控罪訂出量刑起點（三合會成員行事：15或9個月；襲擊致實際傷害：9個月；縱火：36個月；棄期出庭：3個月），然後因被告認罪給予三分之一扣減，並視案件調查與律政司處理造成的檢控延誤再作減刑或給予緩刑。結果採用總量刑原則確定最終刑罰及分期執行。
Source excerpt
Explore more
