Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Possession for trade

Legal area

Court

13 Apr 2006

HKSAR v. SZE PAK YEUNG

Citation

HKSAR v. SZE PAK YEUNG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA64/2006

Having called for and received a favourable probation report recommending medical assessment for suitability for community service, the magistrate erred in imposing an immediate custodial sentence without arranging the recommended medical assessment or explaining why he declined that course; the proper order was to adjourn for a medical report and updated probation report to assess suitability for a community service order, although a community service order was not guaranteed.
27 Apr 2004

HKSAR v. TANG HONG LING AND ANOTHER

Citation

HKSAR v. TANG HONG LING AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA105/2004

The court held that where the circumstances of a guilty plea or sentencing raise significant doubts or mitigation that were not properly explored, the appropriate remedy is to remit the matter for trial (1st Appellant) or to adjourn sentencing to obtain probation/background and CSO reports (2nd Appellant); sentencing requires proper consideration of background reports and the availability of community service as a potential alternative to immediate imprisonment.
23 Jun 2003

HKSAR v. WONG PING CHEUK AND ANOTHER

Citation

HKSAR v. WONG PING CHEUK AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA176/2003

Convictions set aside because the authorization letter and OEM licence legitimately raised the possibility that the 2nd appellant was authorized by OEM to manufacture the goods and the magistrate's sole reliance on PW1's limited evidence that the licensor had not approved the designs made the finding of unauthorized manufacture unsafe; appellants acted reasonably in relying on the legitimate licensee and the written agreement and, on the evidence, the due diligence defence would have succeeded.
30 May 2000

HKSAR v. CHAU CHIU WONG

Citation

HKSAR v. CHAU CHIU WONG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA91/2000

The magistrate's single clear finding that the appellant was seen pushing the trolley was insufficient to support the necessary inference that he knew the cartons contained infringing discs; the magistrate failed to state the basis for the finding that the five invoices related to the compact discs and therefore the conviction could not stand and was quashed.
8 Sept 1999

THE SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. CHOI SAI LOK AND ANOTHER

Citation

THE SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. CHOI SAI LOK AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAAR2/1999

The Court held that the District Judge erred in principle by suspending sentences where no exceptional circumstances existed; employees involved in distribution/transport of large quantities of infringing copies are liable to immediate custody; accordingly the suspended sentences were set aside and replaced by immediate custodial sentences (R1 six months; R2 six and nine months concurrent total nine months), applying specified starting points and reductions for guilty pleas and review discount.
5 Jan 1995

KEENING INDUSTRIAL LIMITED and Another v. R.

Citation

KEENING INDUSTRIAL LIMITED and Another v. R.
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC653/1993

The Court held that (a) the second container was "goods in transit" at the checkpoint and could not sustain a full importing conviction, but the appellants had done all that remained to import the goods so convictions for importing (charges 1 and 3) were substituted with convictions for attempting to import; (b) the first container had been taken off the vehicle and placed in storage so appellants were in constructive possession and convictions for attempting to export (charges 2 and 4) and possession for trade (charges 5 and 6) as found by the trial court were upheld insofar as they related…

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. SZE PAK YEUNG

HKSAR v. TANG HONG LING AND ANOTHER

HKSAR v. WONG PING CHEUK AND ANOTHER

HKSAR v. CHAU CHIU WONG

THE SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. CHOI SAI LOK AND ANOTHER

KEENING INDUSTRIAL LIMITED and Another v. R.