Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Knowledge/mental element

Legal area

Court

23 Jan 2024

HKSAR v. SITHOLE MANDISA NOLIZWE

Citation

[2024] HKCA 101
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC103/2022

Leave to appeal against conviction was refused because the grounds advanced lacked reasonable arguability: the trial judge’s summing‑up fairly summarised the evidence and gave correct directions on burden and standard of proof, the jury were aware of the applicant’s HIV and were properly instructed, no specific examples of prejudicial mistranslation or prosecutorial misconduct were shown, and the jury rationally rejected the defence of lack of knowledge after considering the evidence.
29 Jul 2022

HKSAR v. MUKASERA ESTINA

Citation

[2022] HKCA 1141
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC38/2021

The court granted leave to appeal against conviction on Grounds 1–3 as reasonably arguable because the impugned directions regarding packaging origin, out‑of‑court statements and investigative findings raised arguable issues to be ventilated on appeal; it refused leave on Ground 4 and refused leave to appeal against sentence because the mixed statement direction and the sentence (starting point of 23 years, 2‑year enhancement for international element, 1‑year reduction) were within lawful bounds and not manifestly excessive.
11 Aug 2021

HKSAR v. BABU MD PARVEJ SHIKDAR

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 2561
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA134/2021

The magistrate's inference that the appellant could read and thus knew the cartons contained cigarettes was not supported by objective evidence of his reading standard; therefore the magistrate erred in treating the burden as shifted to the appellant and the conviction was unsafe and must be quashed.
8 Feb 2021

香港特別行政區訴陳少川

Citation

[2021] HKCA 158
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC339/2019

The trial judge's adverse credibility findings were supported by the objective record (applicant as sole director/signatory, pattern and magnitude of rapid dispersals, transfers to applicant and husband, absence of independent documentation for claimed immigration purpose or sale), so it was reasonable to conclude the applicant handled the funds knowing or having reasonable grounds to believe they were proceeds of crime; the appellate court will not overturn those factual findings and dismissed the leave application.
19 Aug 2015

香港特別行政區訴方耀

Citation

香港特別行政區訴方耀
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA671/2014

The trial judge did not err in law or principle: the relevant offences are not strict liability requiring no mental element, the judge properly inferred from the totality of connected evidence that the appellant knew the kind of medicines he possessed and sold, there was no evidential basis to trigger the common law defence of honest and reasonable belief, and therefore the convictions were safe and must be upheld.
11 Apr 2002

HKSAR v. CHAN KWOK CHUNG

Citation

HKSAR v. CHAN KWOK CHUNG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA58/2002

The High Court held the Magistrate did not err in rejecting the appellant's evidence and drawing an adverse inference of knowledge from the surrounding circumstances; appellate deference to the trial judge's credibility findings required dismissal of the appeal.
13 Oct 1998

HKSAR v. TANG YIU KWONG

Citation

HKSAR v. TANG YIU KWONG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC207/1998

The mistranslation did not negate the substance of the Applicant's admissions; the trial judge was entitled to infer knowledge from those admissions; expert evidence established the device met the statutory definition of arms under Cap. 238 s.2(c); accordingly the application for leave to appeal lacked merit and must be dismissed.

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. SITHOLE MANDISA NOLIZWE

HKSAR v. MUKASERA ESTINA

HKSAR v. BABU MD PARVEJ SHIKDAR

香港特別行政區 訴 陳少川

香港特別行政區 訴 方耀

HKSAR v. CHAN KWOK CHUNG

HKSAR v. TANG YIU KWONG

香港特別行政區訴陳少川

香港特別行政區訴方耀