Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Common 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

HCMA348/2022

On a full re‑hearing of the evidence the court was satisfied in each consolidated matter that objective evidence (photographs, sketches, video) and accepted cautioned admissions established the offences beyond reasonable doubt; there is no statutory requirement that prosecutions under the Fire Services (Elimination of Fire Hazard) Regulations be preceded by a 24‑hour notice to avoid prosecution; Housing Department clearance actions were lawful under Cap.283; the trial judge correctly admitted and relied on cautioned statements as voluntary; sentences were within principled range and not manif…
24 Feb 2026

香港特別行政區訴陳見思

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1160
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA243/2021

On a full rehearing the court accepted the trial judge's credibility findings that PW1 and PW2 were honest and that the appellant's account was not credible; the unsigned caution statement and on‑scene admissions were excluded or given no weight; the proposed fresh evidence did not satisfy the established criteria. The evidence proved the two counts of common assault beyond reasonable doubt and the appeal against conviction is dismissed.
13 Feb 2026

香港特別行政區訴鄭小魚

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1024
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA309/2024

On rehearing and after viewing the CCTV (P2) and accepting police identification evidence, the court was satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant intentionally pushed the victim's hand constituting common assault; the conviction is therefore upheld. Having considered the appellant's record and the similarity to a prior suspended sentence, activation of that suspended sentence and ordering consecutive terms was not erroneous or manifestly excessive, so the sentence is upheld.
3 Feb 2026

香港特別行政區訴李崇輝

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 143
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA149/2025

The trial judge's credibility findings accepting PW1 and PW2 and rejecting the appellant were reasonable and supported by the evidence; the act of throwing the document at close range towards PW1 was deliberate or at least reckless and was sufficient to cause apprehension of immediate unlawful force; on re‑hearing the Court of First Instance reached the same conclusion and thus the conviction is safe and is upheld.
31 Dec 2025

香港特別行政區訴涂文耀

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 6476
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA3/2025

The Court was not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant had the requisite indecent intent for indecent assault though the CCTV and contextual factors proved an unlawful intentional touching; accordingly the indecent assault conviction was quashed and substituted with a conviction for common assault under the court's statutory substitution power, with the original sentence of 14 days' imprisonment left unchanged.
16 Dec 2025

香港特別行政區訴吳家浩

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 5859
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA391/2024

The Court dismissed the appeal: the trial judge's questioning fell within permissible bounds and did not deprive the appellant of a fair trial; the judge properly applied burden and precedent, reasonably rejected the appellant's account and accepted the complainant as credible; the evidence proved both counts of common assault beyond reasonable doubt; the sentence of three months for each count with a total effective term of five months (partly consecutive) was not manifestly excessive given the circumstances, prior record and deterrence considerations.
7 Nov 2025

HKSAR v. LEUNG KIT HING DORIS

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 5279
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA44/2024

Interlocutory orders made by the Principal Magistrate were not appealable under s113; the Magistrate properly admitted and accepted the medical, CCTV and bodycam evidence as authentic; the evidence proved the appellant committed common assault beyond reasonable doubt and the arrest warrant for breach of bail was justified; however the original 3 month immediate custodial sentence was excessive in the appellant's circumstances and was reduced to 6 weeks' imprisonment.
28 Oct 2025

香港特別行政區訴梁國輝

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 5920
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA234/2025

The court affirmed that 6 months was an appropriate starting point for each offence given repeated conduct, weapon use and that the victim was a witness, and that a small deduction of 3 days for compensation was warranted; the two offences should run consecutively as they were committed on different dates and involved different elements. However, the trial judge erred in ordering full consecutive execution with the earlier 5‑month sentence without adequately quantifying how much should be concurrent; on totality review the Court ordered 2 months of the prior 5‑month sentence to run concurrent…
25 Jul 2025

香港特別行政區訴孔維民

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 2984
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA144/2025

On a full re-hearing of the evidence the court agreed with the trial judge that the appellant's evidence was not credible and that PW1 and PW2 were reliable; there was no medical evidence to support injury to PW1's head so assault occasioning actual bodily harm was not established, but the accepted evidence proved common assault beyond reasonable doubt; accordingly the appeal against the common assault conviction was dismissed and the original sentence affirmed.
10 Jul 2025

HKSAR v. OTREMBA, ANDREW JOHN

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4260
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA473/2024

After rehearing the evidence and affording appropriate deference to the trial magistrate's advantage in seeing and hearing witnesses, the court concluded PW1's evidence was properly accepted, the Magistrate did not unlawfully rely on uncharged acts, the appellant's guilt for two acts of common assault was proved beyond reasonable doubt, and a deterrent short custodial sentence of 10 days (14 reduced by 4 for mitigation) was appropriate and not excessive.