7 May 2026
On rehearing the judge accepted the magistrate’s findings that the complainant and PW2 were credible, found the magistrate correctly applied principles governing mixed admissions and good character, and concluded beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant indecently assaulted the complainant without consent; therefore the conviction was safe and the appeal was dismissed.
30 Apr 2026
The conviction was affirmed because the rehearing found sufficient evidence that CCHK had a proprietary and commercial interest in the Project so the appellant's solicitation was related to his principal's affairs; the recording and the appellant's VRI admissions established the requisite nexus and culpable state of mind; DW1 did not give permission and no reasonable excuse existed; the magistrate's factual findings and credibility assessments were reasonable and supported by evidence, warranting dismissal of the appeal.
27 Mar 2026
Application refused: the proposed points are academic or without reasonable arguability and do not meet the threshold of being of great and general importance; the judge on rehearing had considered good character impact and did not improperly rely on traffic records, and the right to silence was not infringed in the circumstances of this case.
9 Mar 2026
The High Court, conducting a rehearing, accepted the authenticity and sufficient clarity of the CCTV and matching clothing evidence; having applied Turnbull guidance and considered the appellant's complaints about hearing and hair differences, the court concluded the identification was reliable and the evidence proved the appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt; the appeal was dismissed and conviction and sentence upheld.
6 Feb 2026
Appellate judge conducted a rehearing of all evidence including CCTV, found PW1 credible and discrepancies immaterial or satisfactorily explained, rejected appellant's account as implausible in light of her conduct on CCTV and other evidence, and concluded the prosecution proved theft beyond reasonable doubt; therefore the conviction and fine were affirmed.
29 Jan 2026
On rehearing the court accepted PW1's testimony and the dashcam footage as reliable and decisive; the footage showed the appellant's taxi adopted a right-turn trajectory early, entered the zebra crossing and encroached PW1's lane causing PW1 to brake to avoid collision; that conduct satisfied the statutory standard for careless driving under RTO s38(1) and proved the offence beyond reasonable doubt.
23 Sept 2025
On rehearing the judge found no exceptional circumstances to depart from the established Court of Appeal guideline (15 months on plea, 22.5 months after trial) and concluded the Magistrate did not err in principle; the sentence of 22 months and 2 weeks was appropriate and not manifestly excessive, so the appeal is dismissed.
10 Sept 2025
On rehearing the court was satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the complainant's account of two forced kisses and resistance was credible and that the magistrate's findings were justified; the inconsistencies identified were immaterial or explained and no reasonable mistaken belief of consent could be found, therefore conviction for indecent assault must be affirmed.
8 Aug 2025
鑑於控方在審訊前及審訊期間未向辯方披露PW1及PW4所持有且與案有關的WhatsApp截圖及相關材料，該等未披露資料在本案中直接關涉核心爭點（款項用途）及證人可信性，且令本院在重審時無法確定在毫無合理疑點下被告有罪，故上訴成立，撤銷所有定罪並擱置判處。
13 May 2025
On rehearing the court accepted the complainant's and PW2's credible and consistent evidence, rejected the appellant's account as fabricated, concluded the touching was intentional and took place on a female private part (right breast area) such that a reasonable person would regard it as indecent, and held the evidence proved the offence beyond reasonable doubt; appeal dismissed and conviction and sentence affirmed.