Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Interpreter adequacy

Legal area

Court

4 Dec 2023

HKSAR v. OKAFOR JOE K KINGSLEY

Citation

[2023] HKCA 1327
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC158/2019

The Court refused leave and dismissed the appeal: the evidence (CCTV, calls, impersonation, authorisation letter, possession of identity documents) legitimately supported the inference the applicant knew the parcel contained cocaine; the contested evidence was admissible; complaints about interpretation, jury directions, entrapment, disclosure and counsel competence lacked merit; the sentencing starting point and 1‑year international enhancement were appropriate; leave to appeal sentence out of time was refused; and a 3‑month loss‑of‑time order under s83W was justified because the renewed and…
11 Sept 2023

HKSAR v. YANO HIROKI

Citation

[2023] HKCA 1038
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC195/2021

The judge's overall summing-up and directions on the critical issue of knowledge, the significance of the absence of fingerprints, the adequacy of interpretation, the consistency of the written handout with oral directions, and the use of the verdict proforma were all legally adequate; no error of law was shown and the renewal application for leave to appeal against conviction was refused and the appeal dismissed.
31 Jul 2023

HKSAR v. SOHAG HOWLADER

Citation

[2023] HKCA 923
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC83/2021

The court held the renewal grounds were without merit: no contemporaneous complaint about interpretation was made and a Bengali interpreter had been provided; the unclear photograph did not damage a defence that was properly put to the jury; the limited 'target' information did not require Chung Tang Ping directions because it was not used to identify the applicant and was admitted tactically by defence to support a frame-up theory; the judge adequately directed the jury on circumstantial evidence and the drawing of inferences including what constitutes the only irresistible inference; accord…
5 Jul 2023

RE FAKIR MD MURAD ALI alias MD MURAD ALI FAKIR

Citation

[2023] HKCA 798
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV115/2023

The controlling principle is that the Director and Board are entitled to make primary fact findings in non‑refoulement claims and a court should refuse leave for judicial review where the applicant fails to demonstrate an arguable error of law or procedural unfairness in those decisions.
19 Jul 2022

HKSAR v. YANO HIROKI

Citation

[2022] HKCA 1082
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC195/2021

Leave to appeal refused because the summing-up was fair and balanced, there are no reasonably arguable grounds that the jury directions, the absence of fingerprints, the interpreter's adequacy, the written handout or the proforma questions rendered the conviction unsafe, and there is no reasonably arguable challenge to the sentence or the discount for assistance.
5 Mar 2021

PERVEZ MUHAMMAD v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 470
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL221/2019

The Board properly accepted the applicant's primary facts but reasonably concluded the risk was localized, internal relocation and state protection were viable, and there was no procedural unfairness or legal error; consequently there was no real prospect of success and leave to apply for judicial review was refused.
1 Nov 2016

香港特別行政區訴方朝華

Citation

香港特別行政區訴方朝華
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA307/2016

The trial judge permissibly accepted the prosecution witnesses and documentary evidence; the questionnaire and interview record were admissible and voluntary; the appellant knowingly made a false statement on the arrival questionnaire while aware her husband had died; the appellant failed to prove counsel was seriously incompetent or that any alleged misconduct by staff vitiated the voluntariness of her statements — conviction affirmed.

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. OKAFOR JOE K KINGSLEY

HKSAR v. YANO HIROKI

HKSAR v. SOHAG HOWLADER

RE FAKIR MD MURAD ALI alias MD MURAD ALI FAKIR

HKSAR v. YANO HIROKI

PERVEZ MUHAMMAD v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

香港特別行政區 訴 方朝華

香港特別行政區訴方朝華