Hong Kong Case Law

香港特別行政區 訴 何小華

Court

Court of First Instance

Case number

HCMA179/2025

The trial judge's adverse credibility findings and conclusions that the appellant had accepted and retained payments and issued a bounced cheque were open on the evidence and supported a finding of dishonesty; the written admissions were valid, the trial court properly explained them, the appellant's failure to deploy alleged WhatsApp evidence or call witnesses was not attributable to judicial failings, and the prosecution proved the offence beyond reasonable doubt, therefore the conviction must stand.

Source excerpt

• Deception to evade legal liability
• Admission of facts
• Credibility assessment
• Duty to unrepresented litigant
• Appeal by way of rehearing

Read case analysis

HKSAR v. PATARROYO JIMENEZ GUILLERMO

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

CACC256/2016

The Court of Appeal refused leave to appeal against a 30-month sentence for attempted theft, holding that the sentencing judge’s approach was proper and disclosed no arguable ground.

• Attempted theft
• Pickpocketing
• Sentencing guidelines
• Repeat offending
• Concurrent sentencing
• Leave to appeal

Read case analysis

HKSAR v. CHAN HON MING

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

CACC314/2007

The Court of Appeal dismissed an application for leave to appeal against conviction, holding that flight evidence was admissible and the judge’s directions were adequate.

• Flight evidence
• Jury directions
• Deception
• False accounting
• Letters of credit
• Safety of conviction

Read case analysis

HKSAR v. WONG SUN SANG

Court

Court of First Instance

Case number

HCMA189/1999

Appeal against conviction for procuring a bank entry by deception under s.18D of the Theft Ordinance. The High Court upheld the Magistrate's findings and dismissed the appeal.

• Procuring entry in bank record by deception
• Mens rea
• Dishonesty
• Evidential sufficiency and circumstantial evidence
• Credibility findings
• Safety of conviction on appeal

Read case analysis

THE QUEEN v. TAM SIU LUN

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

CACC42/1986

Appeal against sentence for furnishing false information was partly allowed. The court reduced concurrent three-year terms to two years, citing delay, cooperation, guilty plea, and restitution.

• Furnishing false information
• Sentencing reduction on appeal
• Restitution
• Pre-charge delay
• Cooperation with investigators
• Criminal-sentencing

Read case analysis