Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Co-defendant statements

Legal area

Court

28 Feb 2017

HKSAR v. CHAN YIU SHING AND OTHERS

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 314
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCC41/2016

Severance refused: in a conspiracy indictment joint trial is in the public interest and severance is only for exceptional prejudice; the court found no special feature making a joint trial unfair because the 5th defendant's statements are admissible only against him, prejudice can be managed by clear directions to the jury and editing, and anonymisation would be impractical as it would undermine the prosecution's case that the defendants conspired together.
5 Apr 2016

HKSAR v. HUNG WAI YIP

Citation

HKSAR v. HUNG WAI YIP
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FAMC25/2015

Because the co-defendant who made the exculpatory statements was compellable and available to be called, those out-of-court statements were inadmissible hearsay; Myers does not extend to statements by former co-defendants in separate trials, and counsel's conscious tactical decision not to call the witness did not constitute flagrant incompetence; any extension of hearsay exceptions is for the legislature.
28 Nov 2014

HKSAR v. HUNG WAI YIP

Citation

HKSAR v. HUNG WAI YIP
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC51/2011

Application for certification refused because it was made substantially out of time with no explanation for delay and because the court concluded the posed question had no merit and the law was unambiguous, leaving any change to the legislature.
22 Jun 1989

THE QUEEN v. LAM CHUN SING AND OTHERS

Citation

THE QUEEN v. LAM CHUN SING AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA454/1989

It was a material irregularity for the magistrate to compare cautioned statements of different defendants to reinforce the prosecution witness; each cautioned statement is evidence only for or against its maker and cannot be used to support findings against co-defendants. The irregularity vitiated the convictions which were quashed and the case remitted for retrial.
30 Sept 1980

TSUI SHING-YAU ALIAS AH YAU AND ANTOHER v. THE QUEEN

Citation

TSUI SHING-YAU ALIAS AH YAU AND ANTOHER v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC512/1980

Although voluntary statements taken after charge are not automatically inadmissible, the trial judge's summing-up contained a material irregularity—an improper invitation to compare co-defendant statements that risked using one defendant's extra-judicial statement against the other—rendering the convictions unsafe; provocation did not need to be left to the jury on the evidence; convictions quashed and retrial ordered under s.83(e) Criminal Procedure Ordinance.

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. CHAN YIU SHING AND OTHERS

HKSAR v. HUNG WAI YIP

HKSAR v. HUNG WAI YIP

THE QUEEN v. LAM CHUN SING AND OTHERS

TSUI SHING-YAU ALIAS AH YAU AND ANTOHER v. THE QUEEN