Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Compatibility with bill of rights

Legal area

Court

11 Jul 2007

TONG YIU WAH v. HKSAR

Citation

TONG YIU WAH v. HKSAR
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FACC7/2006

On true construction of s.20(1) of the Airport Authority Bylaw, 'loitering in the Bylaw Area without reasonable cause' are integrated elements of the offence; therefore the prosecution must prove absence of reasonable cause beyond reasonable doubt. Because no reverse burden arises, s.20(1) is not unconstitutional on the grounds advanced. The appellant's conviction is upheld and the appeal is dismissed.
13 Feb 2007

HKSAR v. LO KOK LEONG

Citation

HKSAR v. LO KOK LEONG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA167/2006

Section 33(1) construed does not impose a reverse onus; where the article is not offensive per se the prosecution must prove intent beyond reasonable doubt; the trial court properly found the appellant's cautioned statement voluntary and that no reasonable excuse of self-defence existed because no imminent threat was shown, therefore conviction and sentence were upheld.
4 Jul 2001

HKSAR v. LAU CHEONG AND ANOTHER

Citation

HKSAR v. LAU CHEONG AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC646/1998

The Court held that the grievous bodily harm rule as part of murder mens rea and the secondary offender rule (requiring actual foresight of a real risk) are compatible with the Hong Kong Bill of Rights and the Basic Law; mandatory life sentences do not breach those rights given the statutory Long-Term Prison Sentences Review mechanism and Article 11(4) review can be given effect notwithstanding s83G; accordingly convictions and sentence appeals were dismissed (leave to appeal against sentence granted but dismissed).

Hong Kong Case Law

TONG YIU WAH v. HKSAR

HKSAR v. LO KOK LEONG

HKSAR v. LAU CHEONG AND ANOTHER