Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Judicial questioning

Legal area

Court

16 Dec 2025

香港特別行政區訴吳家浩

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 5859
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA391/2024

The Court dismissed the appeal: the trial judge's questioning fell within permissible bounds and did not deprive the appellant of a fair trial; the judge properly applied burden and precedent, reasonably rejected the appellant's account and accepted the complainant as credible; the evidence proved both counts of common assault beyond reasonable doubt; the sentence of three months for each count with a total effective term of five months (partly consecutive) was not manifestly excessive given the circumstances, prior record and deterrence considerations.
19 Jul 2018

香港特別行政區訴黃熾生

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 1999
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA86/2018

The judge legitimately questioned witnesses and the expert to clarify key matters, properly assessed and accepted the credibility of prosecution witnesses and the expert's limited medical opinion that the appellant was capable of lifting and thrusting his foot; the factual findings were not plainly wrong and the prosecution proved common assault beyond reasonable doubt, therefore the conviction stands.
4 Jul 2017

香港特別行政區訴黃家樂

Citation

香港特別行政區訴黃家樂
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA655/2016

The appeal is dismissed because the magistrate's adverse credibility and factual findings were supported by the evidence and not plainly wrong; her questioning constituted permissible case management and clarification to secure sufficient evidence and did not render the trial unfair or demonstrate bias, therefore the conviction and fine are upheld.
28 Aug 1998

HKSAR v. NGUYEN THI HUONG

Citation

HKSAR v. NGUYEN THI HUONG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA326/1998

The magistrate correctly found as fact that the appellant inserted her hand into the complainant's handbag, an act more than merely preparatory and constituting attempted theft; the magistrate properly evaluated credibility, legitimately considered the cautioned statement in context of the appellant's oral evidence, and did not display disqualifying bias by questioning; accordingly the conviction is safe and the appeal is dismissed.
8 May 1998

HKSAR v. WAI MEI LING

Citation

HKSAR v. WAI MEI LING
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA962/1997

The magistrate's pervasive, leading questioning amounted to entering the arena and created the appearance of bias such that the trial was unfair; the conviction was unsafe and must be quashed; no retrial ordered given the minor nature of the offence and the appellant's age.
29 Nov 1996

R. v. LEUNG KWAN HUNG and Another

Citation

R. v. LEUNG KWAN HUNG and Another
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC578/1995

The trial judge's adverse credibility findings and factual conclusions were within his province and not vitiated by legal error; his questioning of witnesses was proper clarification not improper participation; the incidents were separate so consecutive sentencing was lawful; therefore leave to appeal convictions and the sentence appeals are dismissed.
3 Feb 1994

CHAN HO SANG and Another v. R.

Citation

CHAN HO SANG and Another v. R.
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC147/1993

The Court upheld the trial judge's findings that the first applicant possessed the specific intent to rob despite claimed self-induced intoxication and that the judge's questioning did not compromise impartiality; the judge properly rejected the unsolicited expert opinion which lacked examination of the accused; the second applicant's written statement was voluntary and sufficiently reliable to support conviction; accordingly both applications for leave to appeal were dismissed and convictions and sentences affirmed.
28 Nov 1977

FUNG WONG v. THE QUEEN

Citation

FUNG WONG v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC1230/1977

Because the record was ambiguous about representation, contained unclear and potentially inappropriate questioning by the magistrate, and the Crown would not support the conviction, the conviction was unsafe and was quashed.
18 Apr 1975

LAI KWAN FUNG v. THE QUEEN

Citation

LAI KWAN FUNG v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC120/1975

Because the record repeatedly used the notation 'In answer to Court' without indicating where the court's questioning ended and counsel's examination resumed, it was impossible to determine whether the magistrate crossed into the arena and displayed bias; the appellant was entitled to the benefit of the doubt, so the appeal was allowed and the conviction and sentence set aside.