Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Possession of forged documents

Legal area

Court

24 Aug 2007

HKSAR v. HUNG KONG NAM AND ANOTHER

Citation

HKSAR v. HUNG KONG NAM AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC346/2006

The court upheld the trial judge's factual findings that P4 was voluntary and its admission would not be unfair; even if Rule II had been breached earlier, voluntariness and fairness govern admissibility; the circumstantial evidence was sufficiently compelling to permit the inference that the applicants knowingly participated in and supplied the suite of false documents (including credit cards) to the mainlanders; the sentences were within permissible range and totality was proper.
13 Dec 2001

HKSAR v. VU THI TU

Citation

HKSAR v. VU THI TU
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA1048/2001

The Magistrate was correct to treat the offences as he did including increasing sentence for a repeat illegal remaining and ordering the deportation breach to run consecutively, but the totality principle required a modest reduction in the illegal remaining sentence from 18 to 15 months to produce an overall sentence commensurate with the combined culpability, resulting in a total of 29 months imprisonment.
4 Jun 1998

HKSAR v. LING VERONICA

Citation

HKSAR v. LING VERONICA
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAAR1/1998

The Court held the original concurrent/aggregate sentence was manifestly inadequate for carefully planned commercial mortgage frauds involving breach of trust; it set higher starting points, applied the totality principle and appropriate discounts to substitute an aggregate sentence of four years with specified concurrent and consecutive terms.
13 May 1998

HKSAR v. PHUNG VAN THANG

Citation

HKSAR v. PHUNG VAN THANG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC725/1997

The Court upheld the trial judge's exercise of sentencing discretion: possession charges merited custodial sentences with a starting point of 12 months, the remaining unlawfully charge a starting point of 15 months, and after mitigation the imposed terms (6 months concurrent on possession charges and 15 months consecutive on remaining unlawfully) were appropriate and not reviewable on appeal; the appeal was dismissed and two months between filing notice of appeal and hearing were ordered not to count as time served.
25 Apr 1997

R. v. JERRY WOLF STUCHINER

Citation

R. v. JERRY WOLF STUCHINER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC476/1996

The blank instruments did not meet the statutory definition of 'travel document' in the Immigration Ordinance, rendering the charge and resulting conviction a nullity; the Court of Appeal, exercising its inherent jurisdiction and granting leave to appeal out of time, quashed the conviction and ordered the applicant's discharge; substitution of conviction was inappropriate and must be left to the lower courts upon a fresh charge.
15 Feb 1996

THE QUEEN v. CHAN HUNG

Citation

THE QUEEN v. CHAN HUNG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA1063/1995

Although the imposed sentences were proper given the appellant's two prior convictions, the court held that persuasive humanitarian evidence of the appellant's father's illness warranted allowing the appeal and immediate release.
1 Jun 1993

Chan Chuen-kam and Others v. R.

Citation

Chan Chuen-kam and Others v. R.
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC186/1991

The Court upheld the convictions: the judge's directions on lies, s94A and other contested matters were legally sufficient; any omission to spell out expressly the relevance of good character to credibility did not cause a miscarriage of justice given the overwhelming and corroborative evidence; therefore appeals fail and convictions are safe.
23 Apr 1992

THE QUEEN v. CHEN JU WEN

Citation

THE QUEEN v. CHEN JU WEN
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA164/1992

The magistrate's sentence of 12 months' imprisonment on each charge to be served concurrently was held to be a proper and not excessive sentence in all the circumstances, and the additional family and medical mitigation did not warrant overturning or reducing the sentence; therefore the appeal was dismissed.
27 Feb 1992

R. v. CHU WING KUEN AND ANOTHER

Citation

R. v. CHU WING KUEN AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC398/1991

Given the proved facts that the vessel was within Hong Kong waters and that the eight persons on board were presumed illegal entrants under s.37K, Tsang failed to discharge the statutory onus under s.37C(2)(b); the trial judge’s adverse credibility findings were open to him and the conviction is therefore safe. As to sentence, the captain’s knowledge, role and possession of altered documents justified the 4.5 year sentence which is not manifestly excessive. The delay in transcribing the Reasons for Verdict was improper practice and should be avoided.
12 Jan 1989

THE QUEEN v. NAVARATNAM VIJAYARATNAM AND ANOTHER

Citation

THE QUEEN v. NAVARATNAM VIJAYARATNAM AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC238/1988

The Court found the convictions safe because the evidence established that D1 was the main mover and the guarantees were forged and, in the absence of any satisfactory explanation, adverse inferences drawn by the trial judge were justified; leave to appeal against D1's conviction was refused. On sentencing, the Court found D2's role materially lesser and reduced his sentence from two years to eighteen months to correct unjustified disparity.