Hong Kong Case Law

香港特別行政區 訴 黃皓恆

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

CACC365/2025

Bail pending appeal was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate a reasonable, let alone very high, prospect of success on his proposed conviction and sentence appeals; the trial judge's handling of evidence and admissions did not reveal the legal error alleged under Thongjai; the remand custody credit issue is administrative under s67A and not a proper basis for bail; family or mental stresses did not outweigh these factors.

Source excerpt

• Bail pending appeal
• Conviction appeal
• Sentence computation
• Pre-trial custody credit
• Admissions/confessions
• Evidence assessment

Read case analysis

香港特別行政區 訴 陳賀龍

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

CACC382/2025

Bail pending appeal refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate the requisite exceptional circumstances: his proposed appeals do not have a reasonable (let alone extremely high) prospect of success and the sentence is not manifestly excessive; the trial judge lawfully rejected the applicant's account and was entitled to infer mens rea from the overwhelming transactional evidence.

Source excerpt

• Money laundering
• Bail pending appeal
• Sentencing
• Conviction appeal
• Mens rea

Read case analysis

香港特別行政區 訴 陳麗娜

Court

Court of First Instance

Case number

HCMA11/2025

The trial judge correctly assessed credibility, properly weighed the evidence including the appellant's caution statement and the video evidence, rejected the defence account as inherently implausible, found the prosecution witnesses credible and consistent on the essential facts (pushes then a slap), concluded there was deliberate unlawful application of force not justified by self‑defence, and that the prosecution proved the offence beyond reasonable doubt; therefore the conviction stands and the appeal is dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Assault
• Conviction appeal
• Credibility assessment
• Self-defence
• Police caution statements

Read case analysis

HKSAR v. ANSAR, MAHMOOD

Court

Court of First Instance

Case number

HCMA21/2024

The High Court dismissed a magistracy appeal against a common assault conviction, holding that the magistrate’s credibility findings and evidence supported the verdict.

• Assault
• Conviction appeal
• Credibility assessment
• Video evidence
• Witness testimony (s57a)
• Common-assault

Read case analysis

香港特別行政區 訴 余亮

Court

Court of First Instance

Case number

HCMA385/2024

The appellate court, after reviewing the CCTV and witness evidence and finding the appellant's explanations inconsistent and implausible, upheld the trial judge's acceptance of the prosecution case and concluded the theft was proven beyond reasonable doubt; conviction and sentence were therefore affirmed.

Source excerpt

• Theft
• Conviction appeal
• Witness credibility assessment
• Cctv evidence
• Police cautioned statements

Read case analysis

香港特別行政區 訴 曾迪民

Court

Court of First Instance

Case number

HCMA119/2024

Having re-examined the evidence in a rehearing format, the court accepted the trial magistrate's factual credibility findings that the three prosecution witnesses were honest and reliable; the prosecution proved the offences beyond reasonable doubt; the appellant provided no particulars, failed to attend and advance substantive grounds; therefore the appeal is dismissed and the convictions and sentence are upheld.

Source excerpt

• Indecent assault
• Conviction appeal
• Credibility of witnesses
• Failure to provide grounds
• Absence at appeal

Read case analysis

香港特別行政區 訴 何慶平

Court

Court of First Instance

Case number

HCMA23/2023

Conviction upheld because the licence did not lawfully authorise the appellant's activities (licence had lapsed and its scope was limited to 'unimproved grazing and grass cutting'), objective evidence showed disturbance beyond grass cutting, and the appellant failed to establish an honest and reasonable belief in lawful authority; on sentence the Court substituted the immediate custodial term with the statutory maximum fine in light of mitigation (acting on instructions) and proportionality concerns.

Source excerpt

• Conviction appeal
• Sentencing
• Interpretation of licences
• Credibility assessment
• Honest belief defence

Read case analysis

香港特別行政區 訴 中國國際聯合速遞有限公司

Court

Court of First Instance

Case number

HCMA160/2023

The licences had expired and were not valid after 6/7 May 2021 because renewal requirements under Cap.615 were not satisfied; transaction records together with appellants' admissions sufficiently proved operation of money services without a licence contrary to s29; the second appellant's admissions were clear, voluntary and adequate to support conviction and his application to adduce additional documents failed; the sentences of HKD3,000 per summons (total HKD39,000 for first and third; HKD36,000 for second) were within a reasonable and lenient range given the statutory purpose, scale of tran…

Source excerpt

• Unlicensed money service operation
• Licensing and renewal requirements
• Conviction appeal
• Sentence appeal
• Guilty plea retraction

Read case analysis

香港特別行政區 訴 李勵宏

Court

Court of First Instance

Case number

HCMA159/2023

The court held that (1) the licence had lapsed and the appellants operated money services without a valid licence contrary to Cap.615 s29; (2) the second appellant's admissions were clear, sufficient and voluntary, and did not meet the narrow grounds for overturning a plea; and (3) the fines of HKD3,000 per summons (HKD39,000 for first and third; HKD36,000 for second) were within appropriate range given the statutory purpose and sentencing precedents, so all appeals are dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Unlicensed money services
• License renewal requirements
• Director liability
• Sentencing review
• Conviction appeal

Read case analysis

香港特別行政區 訴 劉貴閩

Court

Court of First Instance

Case number

HCMA54/2023

After rehearing the evidence and repeatedly viewing the P3 dashcam footage, the appellate judge agreed with the trial judge that the video and witness testimony proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant moved his vehicle into the left second lane without sufficient care, causing nearby drivers to brake abruptly and the subsequent collision; the appellant's fresh materials did not meet the criteria for admission and the sentence was appropriate, therefore conviction and sentence were upheld.

Source excerpt

• Careless driving
• Conviction appeal
• Sentence appeal
• Video evidence
• Admission of fresh evidence

Read case analysis