Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Intention (mens rea)

Legal area

Court

12 Sept 2014

HKSAR v. LEUNG FUN SHING

Citation

HKSAR v. LEUNG FUN SHING
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC404/2013

The Court held that the trial judge gave adequate and appropriate directions on provocation using the specimen directions and correctly instructed the jury on causation (mechanical asphyxia as antecedent cause leading to hypoxic brain injury and eventual death); counsel's tactical decision not to call the applicant was a reasonable forensic choice based on clear instructions and likely prejudice if he testified; consequently there was no merit in the grounds of appeal and leave to appeal was refused.
17 Apr 2008

HKSAR v. LO CHI KEUNG

Citation

HKSAR v. LO CHI KEUNG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA890/2007

The appeal was dismissed because the Magistrate's finding that the Appellant deliberately spat fluid into the officer's mouth was supported by the evidence (close proximity, agitation, coughing/spitting sound and the Appellant's confrontational remark) and concerned credibility which was properly for the trial judge to determine; there was no misdirection or failure to take relevant matters into account to justify appellate interference.
27 Mar 2007

SECURITIES AND FUTURES COMMISSION V. ZOU YISHANG

Citation

SECURITIES AND FUTURES COMMISSION V. ZOU YISHANG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA859/2005

The court refused the certificate because the identified points were either matters of settled law that required no clarification or were directed at an unsustainable argument already answered in the judgment; accordingly the discretionary certificate under s32(2) was not granted.
23 Jul 1996

R. v. LAI HO MING

Citation

R. v. LAI HO MING
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA567/1996

The magistrate was entitled to prefer and accept the complainant's evidence over the appellant's; the described repeated rubbing for a few seconds was sufficient to establish deliberate contact and indecent intent beyond reasonable doubt, and the weaknesses raised by the appellant did not render the conviction unsafe.
28 Feb 1995

R. v. CHONG YAN YUK

Citation

R. v. CHONG YAN YUK
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC233/1994

Leave to appeal against the convictions and against the life sentence for attempted murder was refused: the summing up, taken as a whole, adequately presented murder, provocation and manslaughter; any isolated deviation by reference to R v Duffy was cured by subsequent directions consistent with section 4 of the Homicide Ordinance; the evidence supported findings of intent and the convictions; the life sentence, though heavy, was not wrong in principle or excessive.
8 Mar 1988

THE QUEEN v. PANG SHUN YEE AND OTHERS

Citation

THE QUEEN v. PANG SHUN YEE AND OTHERS
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC40/1987

The Court held the trial judge rightly admitted the video/tape as not unfair, gave adequate directions on intention and inferences in the context of the case, and correctly excluded duress for D4 and D5 because they were active participants in the killings; thus convictions were safe and appeals dismissed.
23 Aug 1985

THE QUEEN v. WU WAI-CHI

Citation

THE QUEEN v. WU WAI-CHI
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC102/1985

The Court held the trial judge gave adequate directions on intention and properly left provocation to the jury who could reasonably have rejected it on the evidence; the application for adjournment to obtain psychiatric reports was refused because such evidence could have been obtained before trial and its late introduction would be detrimental to justice, and accordingly the conviction for murder was upheld.
9 Jul 1981

LI YUNG KWAI v. THE QUEEN

Citation

LI YUNG KWAI v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC192/1981

The trial judge's directions were not a misdirection: the foreseeability wording was acceptable where the accused foresaw death or serious injury and acted voluntarily; the omitted Camplin wording on characteristics did not apply to the characteristics relied upon and, even if there had been a non-direction, the proviso applies because the verdict would not have been affected; appeal dismissed.
26 Nov 1975

LAM MUI YAU v. THE QUEEN

Citation

LAM MUI YAU v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC821/1975

Although the summing-up contained confusing and in parts misleading passages, read as a whole the directions were sufficiently clear and any misdirection was not such as to result in a miscarriage of justice; there was adequate corroborative evidence for the unsworn child's testimony; therefore the convictions were properly left standing and the appeal dismissed.