Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Jury communications and disclosure

Legal area

Court

11 Dec 2025

HKSAR v. TAI TIN HO, ZAFAR AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2025] HKCA 1109
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC130/2023

The Court dismissed the appeals against conviction: the identification and circumstantial evidence were sufficient and no material prejudice arose from the judge's redaction of part of the jury note or from answering the jury in writing after consulting counsel. The Court allowed the Secretary for Justice's review of sentence, holding the judge erred in principle by failing to give appropriate weight to the display of a firearm and other aggravating factors; original sentences were quashed and substituted with higher terms of imprisonment to reflect correct starting points.
11 Dec 2025

SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. TAI TIN HO, ZAFAR AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2025] HKCA 1109
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAAR4/2023

The Court held that (1) the redaction of the jury note and the provision of a typed written answer without recalling the jury did not, on the facts and having seen the unredacted note, amount to a material irregularity or miscarriage of justice and the convictions were safe; and (2) the sentencing judge erred in principle by failing to treat the display of a firearm and other aggravating factors as warranting a higher starting point, so the original sentences were quashed and substituted with materially higher terms on review under s81A CPO (D1: 10 years; D2: 9.5 years, with modest reductions…