Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Presumptions of possession and knowledge

Legal area

Court

19 Nov 2003

HKSAR v. LIU HSIU HSIANG

Citation

HKSAR v. LIU HSIU HSIANG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC304/2001

Although the trial judge used imprecise and legally incorrect phrasing in describing the statutory presumptions and omitted some standard directions (eg full lies direction and fuller formula on inferences), those errors were either favourable to the defence or non‑prejudicial in the context of the whole summing up; the travel record was admissible and relevant under Makin to rebut the defence; accordingly the conviction was safe and the appeal is dismissed (leave granted but appeal dismissed).
3 Jul 1998

HKSAR v. CHAN CHUEN HO

Citation

HKSAR v. CHAN CHUEN HO
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC458/1997

The court refused to certify because the issue did not involve a point of great and general importance: the Court of Appeal had not misapprehended the law but arguably misapplied it to the facts, and under established authority (Kwan Ping-pong) a misdirection as to onus rarely justifies applying the proviso to s.83(1).
17 Nov 1988

THE QNEEN v. CHOY HO LING

Citation

THE QNEEN v. CHOY HO LING
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC367/1988

Surveillance evidence placing the accused in control of the bag containing a forensic quantity of controlled drugs, combined with the trial judge's rejection of the defence account and application of presumptions of possession/knowledge, established guilt; the sentencing judge's exercise of discretion to impose a merciful term of 3 years, though below the usual tariff, was not demonstrably wrong and is not interfered with on appeal.
8 Jan 1988

THE QUEEN v. HO SIK YIN

Citation

THE QUEEN v. HO SIK YIN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC313/1987

The Court held the trial judge was entitled to accept the constable's and supporting inspector's evidence despite the destruction of notebooks and the delay, the statutory presumptions arose from occupation and quantity, and the non-production of a cautioned statement or the female visitor did not render the conviction unsafe; application for leave to appeal was dismissed.
23 Oct 1985

THE QUEEN v. CHU MOK YUEN

Citation

THE QUEEN v. CHU MOK YUEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC277/1985

On the proved facts the trial judge either applied or the court could apply the statutory presumptions (or the proviso) and the defendant's account was rejected such that conviction was inevitable; the proposed fresh evidence was not compelling and the additional ground and fresh evidence were refused; leave to appeal against conviction refused.
16 Jan 1985

THE QUEEN v. HOR WAI-MING AND ANOTHER

Citation

THE QUEEN v. HOR WAI-MING AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC497/1984

Convictions upheld because trial judge expressly disbelieved defendant's contrary account, statutory presumptions under the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance applied and were not rebutted on the balance of probabilities, and surrounding circumstances justified inference of joint possession and joint enterprise. Sentences set aside because statutory scheme for young persons (CPO s.109A and JOO s.14) requires imprisonment only if no other method appropriate; trial judge failed adequately to apply that standard, so appellate court substituted detention in training centres.
26 Jan 1984

THE QUEEN v. CHOI YIU KWAI AND ANOTHER

Citation

THE QUEEN v. CHOI YIU KWAI AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC465/1983

Section 39 of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance makes the special evidential rules (including ss.46 and 47) applicable to conspiracy; the presumptions of possession and knowledge arising under ss.46 and 47 therefore applied to the defendants' custody and control of the sacks at No.30 and, unrebutted and combined with other evidence, were sufficient to support convictions for conspiracy to traffic; the trial judge's directions were adequate and the sentences were appropriate (with a technical variation revoking the fine for D.1).
26 Feb 1980

ATTORNEY GENERAL v. WONG KWAI-SUN

Citation

ATTORNEY GENERAL v. WONG KWAI-SUN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC498/1979

Where prosecution relies on ss46/47 presumptions to establish possession from trace quantities, it must prove the scheduled drug was present in a usable quantity; absent such proof the presumptions do not arise and there is no case to answer. The magistrate was correct to dismiss on that basis.
19 Mar 1976

CHAN SIU-HUNG AND OTHERS v. THE QUEEN

Citation

CHAN SIU-HUNG AND OTHERS v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC1091/1975

Although the trial judge's directions on accomplice evidence and corroboration were imperfect (failing to explain corroboration fully and to distinguish between the positions of two defence witnesses), those defects did not cause a miscarriage of justice because substantial independent evidence (observed flight from the room where drugs were being prepared, police observation, and a fingerprint of the appellant on a beaker containing heroin traces) established guilt; therefore the conviction was upheld and the appellate proviso applied.