11 Dec 2007
HKSAR v. CHAN LEUNG YIU, HENRY AND ANOTHER
- Citation
- HKSAR v. CHAN LEUNG YIU, HENRY AND ANOTHER
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCMA394/2007
A1: Flourish was the agent of Timegress by conduct on 18 April and owed a duty to disclose a valid higher offer; A1 deliberately and dishonestly concealed Cerie’s higher offer, satisfying the offence under s16A, so conviction is safe. A2: There was insufficient evidence that he was aware that Cerie’s offer remained valid on 18 April; cannot draw irresistible inference of his knowledge or participation, so his conviction is unsafe and is quashed. Sentencing: A1’s custodial sentence of seven months was not manifestly excessive but on exceptional personal circumstances the sentence is suspended…