13 Dec 2024
The applicant waived his right of silence by replying under caution for criminal damage, so the judge legitimately considered his failure to mention the pitchfork as part of assessing credibility and the self-defence claim; the issue raised was an application of settled principles and did not constitute a point of law of great and general importance, therefore certification was refused.
2 Feb 2021
The Court held the written partnership agreement and power of attorney, executed before solicitors and relied upon by contemporaneous conduct, established a partnership between plaintiff and D1–D3 with plaintiff holding 25% in his own right; plaintiff retired on 15 August 2012 and the partnership dissolved that day; plaintiff was not entitled to an immediate return of HK$2,025,000 but was entitled to orders for accounts and inquiries for the period 23 August 2010 to 15 August 2012 and the attorney (D4) was ordered to provide an account; the defendants' counterclaim alleging plaintiff held his…
17 Sept 2013
The Court refused Top Selection’s application to adduce the Pauline Ching File on appeal because the applicants could, with reasonable diligence, have adduced the material at trial; it dismissed the appeals of Hu and Top Selection, upholding the trial judge’s inference (based on swissfirst papers, fund flow analysis, timing of transactions and documentary conduct) that the Takeover Arrangement was a fabrication and that Hu was the effective beneficial owner; it allowed Ma’s appeal in CACV 91/2012 because PEWC’s knowing receipt case as pleaded did not establish that Ma had the requisite knowle…
18 Jan 2008
Given the agreed facts, contemporaneous use of forged cards in defendants' names, D1's attendance and conduct at the shop after a phone call from Hui, the proximity in time and place of the defendants when cards were used and arrests, and the absence of evidence from the defendants to rebut those inferences, the judge was justified in drawing the inferences necessary to convict D1 and D4 of conspiracy; likewise the judge's adoption of a 3.5 year starting point for conspiracy offences and the sentencing disposals were within proper discretionary range and not manifestly excessive.
14 Mar 2002
In a judge-alone criminal trial the trial judge was entitled to regard the appellants' failure to give sworn evidence as strengthening the prosecution's inference of bribery where the only explanations were extra-judicial statements rejected by the judge and the matters were within the accused's peculiar knowledge; such reasoning did not breach the right to silence and the appeals were to be dismissed, while noting that in jury trials stronger comment is normally exceptional and must be given with caution.
12 Mar 1996
Leave to appeal was refused because the trial judge properly evaluated the circumstantial evidence and credibility of witnesses, including rejection of Mr Wan's evidence, and no arguable error was shown that would justify granting leave.
12 Jan 1989
The Court found the convictions safe because the evidence established that D1 was the main mover and the guarantees were forged and, in the absence of any satisfactory explanation, adverse inferences drawn by the trial judge were justified; leave to appeal against D1's conviction was refused. On sentencing, the Court found D2's role materially lesser and reduced his sentence from two years to eighteen months to correct unjustified disparity.