Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Prosecutorial duty

  • 19 Feb 2025

    香港特別行政區 訴 吳耀宗

    Citation
    [2025] HKDC 223
    Court
    District Court
    Case number
    DCCC1129/2022

    The court held the District Court dangerous‑driving prosecutions arose from the same or substantially the same set of primary facts as the 2019 summons (same incident, same evidential matrix); the prosecution failed to demonstrate any special or exceptional circumstances to justify a further trial; BOR s11(6) is engaged given prior final conviction on the related matter and where engaged the prohibition is non‑discretionary; accordingly the second prosecution constituted an abuse of process and the proceedings were permanently stayed (alternatively, a common‑law discretionary stay was warrant…

  • 9 Oct 2019

    HKSAR v. YU LIK WAI WILLIAM AND ANOTHER

    Citation
    [2019] HKCA 1093
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACC237/2015

    The court held that s.61(4) of the ICSO is capable of a remedial interpretation: the provision must be read to require that any information obtained under a relevant authorization and continuing to be available to the department be provided to the prosecution so that the prosecution may consider whether it meets the statutory disclosure test, and, if so, disclose it to the judge in an ex parte hearing. Reading-in in this manner is a permissible remedial interpretation that cures the constitutional defect without effecting an unlawful legislative amendment, and the prosecutor can apply the sta…

  • 7 Feb 2013

    SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. TANG SAU LING

    Citation
    SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. TANG SAU LING
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACC93/2012

    The Court allowed the appeal, holding the trial judge erred in law by treating the son’s evidence as indivisible and by excluding the probative effect of other prosecution evidence; the prosecutor was entitled to rely on parts of witnesses' accounts and on forensic evidence to put inconsistent inferences to a jury; the disclosed material established a prima facie case of murder and alternatively manslaughter so the discharge under s16 was set aside and trial directed.

  • 27 Nov 1996

    R. v. CHEUNG FONG MAN

    Citation
    R. v. CHEUNG FONG MAN
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCMA958/1996

    The conviction was quashed because the prosecution failed to ensure the court was aware of the appellant's good character and the magistrate consequently failed to direct himself on the two limbs of Berrada (credibility and the effect of age/no previous trouble), creating a fatal flaw in the conviction.