Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Amendment of charges and adjournment

Legal area

Court

4 Oct 1995

THE QUEEN v. CHAN HO LUN

Citation

THE QUEEN v. CHAN HO LUN
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA674/1995

Given the appellant was represented and the magistrate complied with the mandatory requirement to read and explain the amended charge, the magistrate had no duty to solicit applications under s.27(3)(b)&(c); the subsequent review that discharged the bribery charge did not prejudice the appellant's decision to give evidence under s.26; and the tape playback issue was not pursued by defence counsel, so no trial irregularity was established — appeal dismissed.
20 Oct 1989

RE LO WING TONG

Citation

RE LO WING TONG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV62/1989

Post‑hoc explanatory affidavits by the disciplinary adjudicating officer that purport to explain or qualify the tribunal's reasons are inadmissible on judicial review; the AO complied with Regulation 10 when amending charges and no unfairness arose because the defence did not seek adjournment or recall; hearsay and cautioned statements are admissible in disciplinary proceedings with weight for the tribunal to assess and, on the facts, the evidence (including oral evidence and cautioned statements) was sufficient to support findings of knowledge and the convictions; there was no appearance of…