Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Dealing with proceeds of an indictable offence

Legal area

Court

17 May 2017

SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. SIU YUN YEE

Citation

SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. SIU YUN YEE
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAAR6/2016

The Court held the district judge's starting point of 12 months was manifestly inadequate; the appropriate starting point was 18 months, reduced by one-third for guilty plea (to 12 months), less one month for court delay, and a further 3 months allowance for distress/delay on review, producing an aggregate immediate custodial sentence of 8 months; suspension was unjustified because no exceptional circumstances were shown.
29 Sept 2014

HKSAR v. GAVISH OMER

Citation

HKSAR v. GAVISH OMER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC211/2013

Cumulative circumstantial evidence proved beyond reasonable doubt that the applicant was a knowing party to a joint enterprise to deal with 342 gold bars worth HK$139 million and had reasonable grounds to believe they were proceeds of an indictable offence; conviction affirmed and five-year sentence upheld.
7 Mar 2013

HKSAR v. YIP KIM PO AND OTHERS

Citation

HKSAR v. YIP KIM PO AND OTHERS
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC353/2010

The exclusion of the defence expert was appropriate because the opinions relied upon were not shown to derive from a recognised, reliable body of knowledge; the judge did not in fact rely on the co-conspirator hearsay exception but on abundant direct and circumstantial evidence; D1–D5 convictions and associated sentences were supported by irresistible inferences of involvement or reasonable grounds to believe funds were proceeds except D6 where the evidence was insufficient and her conviction and sentence were set aside.
27 Feb 2009

HKSAR v. KWOK CHAU WAH

Citation

HKSAR v. KWOK CHAU WAH
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC210/2008

The judge correctly applied the law that the prosecution need only prove reasonable grounds for belief and that the defendant knew of those grounds; on the facts (large unexplained cash flows through four accounts totaling over HK$18 million, low declared income, transaction patterns) there were objectively reasonable grounds and the applicant knew of them, so the conviction stands and leave to appeal is refused.

Hong Kong Case Law

SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. SIU YUN YEE

HKSAR v. GAVISH OMER

HKSAR v. YIP KIM PO AND OTHERS

HKSAR v. KWOK CHAU WAH