Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Assault

Legal area

Court

27 Mar 2026

香港特別行政區訴黃光忠

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1868
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA156/2024

On re‑hearing the High Court found the documentary, photographic and video evidence and witness testimony credible and the appellant's accounts inconsistent and unreliable; cautioned admissions were voluntary and admissible; Housing Department clearance and Fire Services prosecutions were lawful and required no statutory prior notice for prosecution under the cited provisions; self‑defence and related defences were unavailable on the facts; therefore the evidence proved the offences in all four appeals beyond reasonable doubt and the sentences were not manifestly excessive — all appeals dismi…
27 Mar 2026

香港特別行政區訴黃光忠

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1868
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA135/2023

Applying the retrial standard the court re‑examined all evidence and was satisfied beyond reasonable doubt—on objective photographic and video evidence, credible witness testimony and voluntary admissions—that the appellant committed the offences in all four matters; the cautioned statements were voluntary; neither the Fire Services subsidiary regulation nor the Housing Ordinance require a pre‑prosecution 24‑hour notice as alleged by appellant; the Housing Department clearance action was lawful; the sentences and fines imposed were within permissible range and not manifestly excessive, and cu…
20 Mar 2026

香港特別行政區訴涂文耀

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1607
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA3/2025

The application for a s32 certificate is refused because the applicant simply reasserts factual disputes and sentencing complaints that do not raise a point of law of great and general importance under s32(2); the substitution to common assault and the unchanged 14‑day sentence do not present a legal issue warranting certification.
13 Feb 2026

廖芷彤對崔思遠

Citation

[2026] HKDC 113
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI2789/2021

Defendant is civilly liable for the assault; the defendant's criminal conviction under ESCC 749/2019 is admissible under s62 and establishes the defendant committed the assault; medical expert evidence supporting exaggeration of long‑term symptoms was preferred over experts who relied on treating psychiatrists without explaining objective bases; plaintiff's asserted long‑term post‑concussional syndrome and loss of earning capacity were not proven on the balance of probabilities; damages assessed at HKD 204,140 but wholly offset by prior workers' compensation payments of HKD 694,182.14 so no p…
5 Feb 2026

香港特別行政區訴李秀含

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 314
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA150/2025

On a full re‑hearing of the evidence the court agreed with the trial judge's detailed credibility findings, concluded the prosecution proved the offence of fighting in a public place beyond reasonable doubt, rejected the appellant's self‑defence claim as unreasonable and retaliatory, and therefore dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction.
9 Jan 2026

香港特別行政區訴曾維誠及另一人

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 230
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA485/2024

Video and witness evidence proved beyond reasonable doubt that appellants intentionally or recklessly and jointly applied unlawful force by repeatedly and at close range spraying and pouring water at police officers and working journalists, conduct that exceeded any reasonable festival consent; therefore convictions for assault/battery and convictions on all counts were upheld and appeals dismissed.
24 Dec 2025

香港特別行政區訴蔡國健

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 6370
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA105/2024

重審後法院確信控方憑PW1及PW2之可信證供、客觀醫療報告與相片證據，以及上訴人自願之口頭招認及補錄警誡供詞，已在毫無合理疑點下證明兩項控罪要素；裁判官對辯方證人之不接納屬合理可信之裁量，故駁回上訴並維持定罪與刑罰。
23 Dec 2025

CHAN HUI MAY KIU 對 CHING WING FAT及另一人

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 6428
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI1394/2016

First defendant (Ching) liable for the assault on CHAN HUI MAY KIU and must pay damages; second defendant (Tung Wah) owed visitors a duty of care but the assault was an intentional third‑party act which was not shown to be a reasonably foreseeable or preventable consequence of Tung Wah's management such that causation failed; plaintiff CHAN HEI MAN failed to prove she was assaulted; accordingly claims against Tung Wah dismissed and CHAN HEI MAN's claims dismissed; damages to CHAN HUI MAY KIU assessed at HK$56,380 plus interest and costs as ordered.
6 Oct 2025

LEUNG TSZ KIN 對 TO KAI WA

Citation

[2025] HKDC 1632
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI1968/2022

Criminal convictions established that the defendant assaulted the plaintiff and caused the injuries; the defendant produced no new or credible evidence to rebut the convictions or to justify relitigation; contributory negligence was not established and is inapplicable to the intentional assault; the additional retirement pension is not deductible from the plaintiff's damages. Defendant is civilly liable and damages are assessed at HK$152,500 plus interest and costs to plaintiff.
11 Sept 2025

香港特別行政區訴俞家歡

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4220
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA413/2024

The court found on re-hearing that the appellant's evidence was internally inconsistent and implausible, that the force used was disproportionate to a single slap by an elderly victim, and that the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt that the assault was not in self-defence; appeal dismissed and conviction and sentence upheld.