Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Credibility and evaluation of witnesses

Legal area

Court

29 Nov 2023

WONG KA YAN PATRICK v. CHEUNG KA YU NICOLE formerly known as CHEUNG LEE HUNG

Citation

[2023] HKCA 1310
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV522/2021

The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's findings that Wong failed to prove a common intention constructive trust or trusteeship: the judge's credibility findings and holistic evaluation of factual context (relationship, source of funds, Wong's pattern of property holding, absence of written trust instrument) were open to her and not plainly wrong; payments were held to be gifts and the presumption of resulting trust was rebutted, so no beneficial interest in Wong.
21 May 2014

HKSAR v. SHEKHAWAT, TUSHAR

Citation

HKSAR v. SHEKHAWAT, TUSHAR
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA9/2014

The Magistrate was plainly wrong to reject the appellant's and the bus driver's evidence and to rely on photographs to infer inconsistency; on rehearing the totality of credible evidence did not prove the appellant guilty of dangerous driving beyond reasonable doubt, therefore the conviction must be quashed and sentence set aside.
18 Oct 2007

HKSAR v. LEUNG PING NAM

Citation

HKSAR v. LEUNG PING NAM
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA432/2007

The magistrate was entitled to accept the prosecution witnesses as credible after observing them and, based on accepted primary facts (no inspector chop or signature on Exhibit P1 when handed to appellant, presence of chop/signature when presented to PW5, PW3 did not present or see the form again, PW4 denied signing), the only non‑speculative inference is that the appellant affixed the chop and signature and presented the form; convictions affirmed. On sentence, given extraordinary delay not attributable to appellant, concurrent six‑month sentences suspended for two years were appropriate.
11 Jun 1996

THE QUEEN v. TSANG PUI LAM

Citation

THE QUEEN v. TSANG PUI LAM
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA147/1996

The court held that the chain of custody was established by identification of the sealed tamper‑proof envelope and the Government Chemist certificate, the magistrate properly evaluated credibility and evidence, and therefore the conviction was safe and the appeal must be dismissed.
7 Nov 1990

THE QUEEN v. CHOW WING SUN AND ANOTHER

Citation

THE QUEEN v. CHOW WING SUN AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA1223/1990

The appeal was allowed and convictions quashed because the magistrate's findings were inconsistent and inadequately reasoned, key credibility assessments were unsafe given conflicting evidence (notably PW1 v PW4), the magistrate applied the wrong test to the allegation that defendants 'duly performed services', and on the whole the convictions were unsafe; the court exercised discretion against ordering a retrial given low prospect of success and time already served by the first appellant.
30 Nov 1973

LEUNG MAN WAI v. THE QUEEN

Citation

LEUNG MAN WAI v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC842/1973

The magistrate was entitled to accept the Crown witness's account that a knife was found on the appellant in the street; discrepancies were peripheral and did not undermine the core finding; a lay-identifiable knife's admissibility was not vitiated by lack of proof of continuous custody; no adequate basis existed for appellate interference, so the conviction is upheld.

Hong Kong Case Law

WONG KA YAN PATRICK v. CHEUNG KA YU NICOLE formerly known as CHEUNG LEE HUNG

HKSAR v. SHEKHAWAT, TUSHAR

HKSAR v. LEUNG PING NAM

THE QUEEN v. TSANG PUI LAM

THE QUEEN v. CHOW WING SUN AND ANOTHER

LEUNG MAN WAI v. THE QUEEN