25 Jul 2025
HKSAR v. LAM CHUNG YIU CHARLES
- Citation
- [2025] HKCFI 3294
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCCC98/2023
The court rejected the defendant's arguments that the civil judgment debt constituted an 'obligation having priority' and that it could refuse to make a confiscation order to avoid double recovery. The defendant failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the AMBR was nil or significantly lower; the court accepted the prosecution's asset identification and expert watch valuation (subject to excluding one sold item and one illegible tag) and found AMBR (net of four returned watches if forfeited separately) was HK$12,200,461.79, which is less than the VoP (USD$1,875,030.64); therefore…