Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Private tenancy allowance claims

Legal area

Court

14 Nov 2014

HKSAR v. MAK CHAI KWONG AND ANOTHER

Citation

HKSAR v. MAK CHAI KWONG AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC309/2013

Although the trial judge made erroneous findings about who provided the purchase monies, the appellate court held that the judge’s independent and untainted findings that the applicants entered a prior composite scheme of cross‑holding and bogus cross‑leasing established beneficial (financial) interests and dishonest intent to mislead the Government when claiming PTA; those findings rendered the convictions safe and the appeals were dismissed.
30 Mar 1999

HKSAR v. LEUNG YAT MING AND ANOTHER

Citation

HKSAR v. LEUNG YAT MING AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC443/1998

The court held the trial judge was entitled to pierce the corporate veil on the evidence that Marble Shine was a nominee vehicle concealing the applicants' beneficial interests; once that interest was established there was ample evidence the applicants knowingly used false declarations with intent to deceive; s.9(3) of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance applies to such internal documents and does not require an inter partes third party transaction, therefore the applications for leave to appeal were dismissed.