Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Section 65b statements

Legal area

Court

5 Sept 2014

HKSAR v. CHAN HOK NING, RICKY AND ANOTHER

Citation

HKSAR v. CHAN HOK NING, RICKY AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA339/2014

The judge accepted the prosecution witnesses and admissions, found the representation that purchasers were referred by FAPA was false and made with intent to defraud, concluded D2 joined D1 in a joint enterprise, that acts were more than preparatory and that the prosecution proved attempted fraud beyond reasonable doubt, so the convictions were upheld.
5 Sept 2003

HKSAR v. CHAN YEE CHING

Citation

HKSAR v. CHAN YEE CHING
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA736/2003

The Magistrate permissibly drew multiple corroborative inferences from circumstantial and documentary evidence — substantial commission payments into the appellant's pay account, signature comparison evidence, AIA's normal office and payment procedures, and personal information linking the appellant — and these concurrent factors supported the conclusion that the appellant knew of and participated in the fraudulent scheme; admissible section 65B statements and expert opinion reinforced those inferences, so the convictions were upheld.