Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Failure to call witnesses

Legal area

Court

22 Jun 2006

CHEUNG YIU WING v. CELESTIAL ASIA SECURITIES HOLDINGS LTD

Citation

CHEUNG YIU WING v. CELESTIAL ASIA SECURITIES HOLDINGS LTD
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV254/2005

The appeal was dismissed because the omissions relied on did not establish a substantial miscarriage of justice warranting a retrial; alleged solicitor negligence is not a proper basis for setting aside a judgment obtained after a full trial and the correct remedy is an action against the solicitor; the appeal was unarguable and costs were awarded on an indemnity basis.
16 Jul 1997

HKSAR v. LAM LUN KEI

Citation

HKSAR v. LAM LUN KEI
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC506/1996

Leave to appeal was refused because there were no arguable grounds: defence counsel acted properly within instructions, the summing-up sufficiently presented the expert's limitations and defence, and the cumulative circumstantial evidence supported the convictions in absence of any explanation.
29 Feb 1996

THE QUEEN v. HWA TAK MING

Citation

THE QUEEN v. HWA TAK MING
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA1165/1995

Withholding the terms of an immunity granted to the principal prosecution witness was an irregularity that prejudiced the defence; that prejudice rendered the convictions unsafe and required allowing the appeal and ordering a retrial before a different magistrate; costs were awarded to the appellant for prosecutorial negligence.
26 May 1978

CHOI KAM-SHING v. THE QUEEN

Citation

CHOI KAM-SHING v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC362/1978

The convictions were quashed because the confessional statement, which was the sole basis for conviction, was unreliable and the trial process showed material breaches (including departure from Rule 3, uncertain chronology, untested new allegations due to lack of cross-examination, and gaps in prosecution evidence) such that the convictions were not safe.
7 Nov 1975

TAM KAM-CHUEN v. THE QUEEN

Citation

TAM KAM-CHUEN v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC940/1975

Because the appellant failed to call witnesses at trial through his own misunderstanding of the situation, the conviction and fine were set aside and the case was remitted for rehearing to allow him to present those witnesses; the magistrate was not at fault.
29 Jan 1968

CHEUNG KAM YIN AND OTHERS v. THE QUEEN

Citation

CHEUNG KAM YIN AND OTHERS v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC652/1967

Appeal allowed because the summing‑up contained fundamental misdirections and failed to direct the jury on separate defences and on proper treatment of conflicting expert evidence; medical evidence did not reliably confine the fatal injury to the period the deceased was in appellants' custody and the overall evidence was insufficient and unsafe to sustain convictions, therefore convictions quashed.

Hong Kong Case Law

CHEUNG YIU WING v. CELESTIAL ASIA SECURITIES HOLDINGS LTD

HKSAR v. LAM LUN KEI

THE QUEEN v. HWA TAK MING

CHOI KAM-SHING v. THE QUEEN

TAM KAM-CHUEN v. THE QUEEN

CHEUNG KAM YIN AND OTHERS v. THE QUEEN