Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Recognition evidence

Legal area

Court

25 Nov 2021

HKSAR v. ASIF AHFAQ MEHMOOD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 3643
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCC138/2020

CCTV recordings are admissible and cannot be excluded as an exercise of the court's discretion merely because of variable quality; image quality is a matter of weight for the jury. Police officers may give recognition evidence identifying persons in CCTV if the prosecution lays the proper foundation demonstrating the officer's sufficient acquaintance with the defendant (duration and nature of contact, contemporaneous observations or ability to refresh memory) and the jury will assess reliability with appropriate Turnbull-style directions; Tagao does not preclude recognition evidence where oth…
4 Jan 2008

HKSAR v. TSE TING CHEONG

Citation

HKSAR v. TSE TING CHEONG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA698/2007

The Court held that the magistrate properly found the identification was by recognition given the prior acquaintance between victim and appellant, that the magistrate had considered the alleged discrepancies, and that there was no basis to conclude the conviction was unsafe; therefore the appeal was dismissed.
31 Jan 2000

LAU TAT KEUNG v. HKSAR

Citation

LAU TAT KEUNG v. HKSAR
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FAMC30/1999

Leave to appeal denied because the questions raised involved application of settled law to facts rather than novel points of law, and the applicant failed to establish a reasonably arguable case that there was a departure from accepted norms amounting to substantial and grave injustice; the Court of Appeal properly directed the jury and the convictions were not unsafe or unsatisfactory.
12 Sept 1997

HKSAR v. CHUNG CHI MAN

Citation

HKSAR v. CHUNG CHI MAN
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA485/1997

Because the learned magistrate did not direct himself on the quality of the identification/recognition evidence in a case where identification was the crucial issue, the conviction was rendered unsafe; the appeal is allowed and the monetary penalty set aside.
23 Jul 1997

HKSAR v. LEUNG CHI SHING

Citation

HKSAR v. LEUNG CHI SHING
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA416/1997

The magistrate failed to give the necessary Turnbull-style warning on identification evidence despite the prosecution case resting on recognition; following Beckford and Tran Cuong this was an error of law that rendered the convictions unsafe and required quashing.
15 Mar 1996

R. v. DINH VAN DUONG and Another

Citation

R. v. DINH VAN DUONG and Another
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC551/1995

The judge's summing-up was selective and misleading, failed to give necessary Turnbull directions on recognition and blunted required warnings; those misdirections rendered the convictions unsafe, therefore the appeals were allowed, convictions and sentences set aside and retrial ordered.

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. ASIF AHFAQ MEHMOOD AND OTHERS

HKSAR v. TSE TING CHEONG

LAU TAT KEUNG v. HKSAR

HKSAR v. CHUNG CHI MAN

HKSAR v. LEUNG CHI SHING

R. v. DINH VAN DUONG and Another