Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Jury communications

  • 25 Aug 2015

    HKSAR v. LAM MEI NGAR

    Citation
    HKSAR v. LAM MEI NGAR
    Court
    Court of Final Appeal
    Case number
    FAMC8/2015

    Leave to appeal was dismissed because the applicant failed to demonstrate a substantial and grave injustice: the jury had not in fact reached a firm conclusion nor was there proof that secret communications or the judge's handling caused prejudice; differences in evidence explained acquittals of others; there was sufficient evidence to refuse a no case to answer submission; the expert's comments were within scope or harmless; and the summing up was fair and not biased.

  • 7 Dec 2011

    MAHAL HARPREET SINGH v. HKSAR

    Citation
    MAHAL HARPREET SINGH v. HKSAR
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACC462/2010

    Conviction grounds dismissed: trial judge did not err in juror discharge, permitting contextual cross-examination about an uncharged act, directions, or handling of prosecutor's remarks; jury's withdrawn CCTV request did not prejudice accused. Sentencing appeal allowed in part: trial judge identified valid aggravating features but starting points were manifestly excessive in light of the circumstances and because the judge relied upon a psychological victim impact report that had not been disclosed to defence; applicant entitled to adjusted concurrent sentences of 6 years 6 months (rape) and…

  • 26 Jan 2007

    HKSAR v. LEUNG WAI HUNG

    Citation
    HKSAR v. LEUNG WAI HUNG
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACC52/2006

    The private communication to the jury via the usher and the judge's unsignalled oral reply in circumstances where the jury requested a copy of the summing-up (a matter touching the merits) constituted a material irregularity because counsel were denied the opportunity to be informed and to make submissions and because the reply was not in open court; coupled with inappropriate direction that telephone calls and lies could stand independently of the accomplice's testimony and the absence of an express direction that no adverse inference should be drawn from the applicant's silence, the convict…