Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Admission to police

Legal area

Court

18 May 2007

LEUNG SHIU MAN formerly t/a HONG LIK CLEANING SERVICING CO v. CHU WAI MING t/a MING SHUN CLEANING SERVICE CO AND ANOTHER

Citation

LEUNG SHIU MAN formerly t/a HONG LIK CLEANING SERVICING CO v. CHU WAI MING t/a MING SHUN CLEANING SERVICE CO AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI879/2005

The Plaintiff's unambiguous admission to police that he was responsible for repair and maintenance, reinforced by inconsistent and unreliable retractions and supported by the commercial and contractual analysis of the hire-purchase arrangement, establishes that the Plaintiff owed the duty to keep HM247 in good repair; accordingly the Plaintiff's claim is dismissed and the 1st Defendant succeeds on his counterclaim for repair costs.
25 Nov 1999

HKSAR v. LEE WAI KWOK

Citation

HKSAR v. LEE WAI KWOK
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA671/1999

The Court dismissed the appeal because ownership was established and, although the evidence was chiefly circumstantial, there was sufficient evidence together with the appellant's admission for the magistrate properly to find appropriation and the requisite intent to permanently deprive.
1 Aug 1997

HKSAR v. FUNG YIM KEUNG

Citation

HKSAR v. FUNG YIM KEUNG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA557/1997

The magistrate's credibility findings that two prosecution witnesses were honest and reliable and that their evidence corroborated the driver's account, together with the appellant's admission, made the conviction safe; appeal dismissed.
13 Jun 1995

R. v. AU HO CHEUNG

Citation

R. v. AU HO CHEUNG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA435/1995

Given the rejected explanation, the appellant's contemporaneous admission that he knew it was wrong combined with his conduct (throwing the phone away when police approached) justified the only reasonable inference of dishonesty and intention to permanently deprive; therefore the conviction was upheld and the appeal dismissed.
16 Oct 1976

LEE TIT-LUN v. THE QUEEN

Citation

LEE TIT-LUN v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC910/1976

The conviction was unsafe because the only substantial incriminating evidence was an alleged police admission whose reliability was doubtful given a language barrier and the magistrate expressed some doubt; therefore the appeal was allowed and the conviction set aside.

Hong Kong Case Law

LEUNG SHIU MAN formerly t/a HONG LIK CLEANING SERVICING CO v. CHU WAI MING t/a MING SHUN CLEANING SERVICE CO AND ANOTHER

HKSAR v. LEE WAI KWOK

HKSAR v. FUNG YIM KEUNG

R. v. AU HO CHEUNG

LEE TIT-LUN v. THE QUEEN