Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Right to remain silent

Legal area

Court

13 Feb 2009

HKSAR v. MD ARIF HOSSAIN AND ANOTHER

Citation

HKSAR v. MD ARIF HOSSAIN AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC177/2008

The convictions for charges 1 (robbery), 2 (wounding with intent) and 4 (indecent assault) were quashed because the trial judge impermissibly relied on the applicants' silence after arrest and caution as a central element in rejecting the defence, contrary to the principle in Lee Fuk Hing; the immigration conviction (charge 3 under s.38(1)(b) Cap 115) was upheld by applying the proviso to s.83 CPO because independent evidence (movement records pattern, possession of forged Immigration document, timing and character of lost‑passport report) established unlawful landing and remaining despite co…
18 Jul 2001

AU WING LUN WILLIAM v. THE LAW SOCIETY OF HONG KONG

Citation

AU WING LUN WILLIAM v. THE LAW SOCIETY OF HONG KONG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1378/2001

The application for extension of time was refused because the delay of about 11 months was not reasonably explained by an experienced solicitor, the proposed grounds of appeal were unarguable given the Tribunal relied on the applicant's own admissions and Court of Appeal findings, privilege and silence arguments either did not avail the applicant or could not be raised retrospectively, and allowing the appeal would be a waste of time and costs.
3 Jul 2001

HKSAR v. CHEUNG HOI HOI

Citation

HKSAR v. CHEUNG HOI HOI
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA153/2001

The appeal is allowed because the magistrate failed adequately to analyse and explain whether the victim's reaction constituted corroboration or only a recent complaint and thereby failed to apply the correct warnings and reasoning; that deficiency rendered the conviction unsafe despite the otherwise compelling evidence.
14 Jan 1999

HKSAR v. KWOK PAK HO

Citation

HKSAR v. KWOK PAK HO
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA1162/1998

The learned Magistrate impermissibly relied upon the appellant's exercise of his right to remain silent (post‑caution and election not to give evidence) as if the tribunal could treat that silence 'at large'; that error rendered the conviction unsafe and required the conviction to be quashed and the sentence set aside; no retrial was ordered and costs were refused due to appellant's conduct misleading the police.
7 Oct 1998

HKSAR v. KWOK CHAK KAN, NIPON

Citation

HKSAR v. KWOK CHAK KAN, NIPON
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA939/1997

The court found counsel had advised the appellant to give evidence, the appellant voluntarily refused because of fear of cross-examination, counsel's conduct was not flagrantly incompetent and did not deny the appellant a fair trial; therefore the convictions are safe and the appeal is dismissed.
25 Feb 1969

LI KIM HUNG v. THE QUEEN

Citation

LI KIM HUNG v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC704/1968

The conviction was set aside because the judge improperly relied on evidence given during the voir dire when he sat alone; such evidence must be disregarded on the general issue as its use would impair the accused's right to remain silent, and reliance on it was decisive to the finding of guilt.

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. MD ARIF HOSSAIN AND ANOTHER

AU WING LUN WILLIAM v. THE LAW SOCIETY OF HONG KONG

HKSAR v. CHEUNG HOI HOI

HKSAR v. KWOK PAK HO

HKSAR v. KWOK CHAK KAN, NIPON

LI KIM HUNG v. THE QUEEN