Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Demand with menaces

Legal area

Court

21 Jul 2000

HKSAR v. LO CHI YIP AND ANOTHER

Citation

HKSAR v. LO CHI YIP AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC546/1999

Convictions were upheld because PW1 had ample opportunity and prior acquaintance to identify the 2nd applicant and the aggregate conduct (demand, slang, and immediate violent conduct) established an immediate demand with menaces; sentencing was appropriate for deterrence except that the 1st applicant was entitled to the full one-third discount for a timely guilty plea, reducing his wounding sentence to 4 years 8 months and total effective sentence to 6 years 8 months.
18 Sept 1997

HKSAR v. WONG WAI YIP and Another

Citation

HKSAR v. WONG WAI YIP and Another
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC718/1996

The judge was entitled to find on the evidence that the demands were unwarranted and made with menaces without reasonable grounds; the applicants' defence of acting to protect a legitimate business interest was disbelieved and the findings of extortion and joint enterprise were sustainable, so the appeals must be dismissed.
20 Oct 1995

R. v. CHAU CHUNG WAI

Citation

R. v. CHAU CHUNG WAI
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC126/1995

The trial judge found the applicant was a party to demands with menaces; that factual finding precluded his denial of intent on a sentence appeal, his role was not minor, and the imposed sentence of three years three months was not manifestly excessive, therefore the application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
26 Jul 1994

R. v. CHAM TAK MING

Citation

R. v. CHAM TAK MING
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA527/1994

The magistrate, being in the best position to assess PW1's credibility, could find the appellant was party to threats and believed he had a right to demand repayment; because the defence did not raise that the appellant believed the menaces were a proper means, and the means were plainly improper, the appellant's lack of subjective belief need not be considered under R v Lawrence and Pomroy, so the conviction stands.
3 Aug 1978

LEUNG CHUNG-KUN v. THE QUEEN

Citation

LEUNG CHUNG-KUN v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC551/1978

The magistrate, entitled to assess witness credibility, found the appellant exposed a revolver and made unwarranted demands with menaces on the facts; those demands amounted to blackmail under Section 23 of the Theft Ordinance and the evidence was sufficient to prove mens rea and sustain the conviction; the appellate court will not disturb those findings, so the appeal is dismissed.

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. LO CHI YIP AND ANOTHER

HKSAR v. WONG WAI YIP and Another

R. v. CHAU CHUNG WAI

R. v. CHAM TAK MING

LEUNG CHUNG-KUN v. THE QUEEN