Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Admissions under section 65c criminal procedure ordinance

Legal area

Court

14 Dec 2007

HKSAR v. MITHU MOHABUB ZAMAN

Citation

HKSAR v. MITHU MOHABUB ZAMAN
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA846/2007

The magistrate was entitled to disbelieve the appellant's testimony in light of the admitted facts and passport movement record (Exhibit P3) which compelled the inference of unlawful landing after 24 December 2004; consequently the conviction was safe, and the 16-month sentence (after lawful review under s.104(5)) was within lawful bounds and not manifestly excessive.
22 Dec 1999

HKSAR v. LIEM HUNG AND OTHERS

Citation

HKSAR v. LIEM HUNG AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA554/1999

None of the four questions raised qualified as points of law of great and general importance arising from the judge's final decision; the Report contained evidence of deterioration and inadequate safety factors which constituted a proper cause under s27A to justify the BA's Order; admissions and documentary evidence established the wall as retaining such that the point that it was not a retaining wall had no merit; the BA was entitled to require an investigation to a standard acceptable to it and the appellants failed to comply, therefore the certificate is refused and costs ordered.
10 Jul 1997

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION v. LAI WAH

Citation

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION v. LAI WAH
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA456/1997

The appellant's unchallenged admissions and the agreed facts (presence at premises used as a vice establishment, roles in cleaning and opening doors, knowledge of prostitution and supply of condoms, and conduct suggesting warning others) provided overwhelming evidence that he took a significant part in assisting the running of the vice establishment; the learned Magistrate's inferences were permissible and the conviction was safe and must be affirmed.
8 Feb 1985

THE QUEEN v. HO CHI FAI AND OTHERS

Citation

THE QUEEN v. HO CHI FAI AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA825/1984

Section 139 covers use of premises by women offering themselves for lewdness for gain whether indiscriminately or selectively; the proved lewd conduct on 31 August 1984 plus admissions, the bills' numbering and structure, and the premises' layout provided sufficient evidence to conclude the premises had been habitually used and therefore were kept as a vice establishment; appeal dismissed.
2 Feb 1985

THE QUEEN v. CHEUNG CHUNG YAU AND ANOTHER

Citation

THE QUEEN v. CHEUNG CHUNG YAU AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA33/1985

Because the appellants' contemporaneous admissions under s65C supported a genuine subjective belief that the window was abandoned, they lacked the intention to steal at the relevant time; the magistrate erred in either disregarding the conclusive effect of admissions or in finding the window had already been removed contrary to the admitted facts, and therefore the convictions for going equipped were unsustainable and were quashed.
17 Jan 1979

ATTORNEY GENERAL v. WONG PANG

Citation

ATTORNEY GENERAL v. WONG PANG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC797/1978

An admission under s65C that a defendant made a statement admits the making of the statement as a fact but does not automatically bind the court to accept the truth of the statement's contents; the court may treat the admitted fact as evidence and draw proper inferences therefrom unless the parties have explicitly agreed that the admitted facts constitute the entire factual basis of the case. Wong Kwai-ping was wrongly decided and overruled; the magistrate must proceed to trial on the original charge and may draw inferences from the admitted statement.

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. MITHU MOHABUB ZAMAN

HKSAR v. LIEM HUNG AND OTHERS

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION v. LAI WAH

THE QUEEN v. HO CHI FAI AND OTHERS

THE QUEEN v. CHEUNG CHUNG YAU AND ANOTHER

ATTORNEY GENERAL v. WONG PANG