Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Soliciting and accepting advantages

Legal area

Court

17 Jul 1998

HKSAR v. THAM CHEE SENG

Citation

HKSAR v. THAM CHEE SENG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC22/1998

The court upheld the trial judge’s acceptance of uncontradicted, consistent prosecution witness testimony and the identification of an underlying pattern of similar demands and cash payments; from that pattern the requisite state of mind and, where pleaded, deception could be inferred, so the convictions (and alternative deception findings) were supported by sufficient evidence and the appeal was dismissed.
8 Sept 1976

ROBERT CHAN HING-CHEUNG v. THE QUEEN

Citation

ROBERT CHAN HING-CHEUNG v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC337/1976

The Court held the conspiracy conviction unsafe and quashed it because the prosecution evidence (notably inconsistencies in principal witness statements, hearsay limits and credibility issues) did not reliably prove a single knowing agreement involving the appellant; however, the substantive convictions for soliciting and accepting advantages were upheld because the appellant accepted payments linked to his public duty without lawful authority and failed to discharge the burden under s.25 to show reasonable excuse.
5 Mar 1976

STEPHEN LI SHUET-LO v. THE QUEEN

Citation

STEPHEN LI SHUET-LO v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC223/1976

Given the mitigating factors (guilty plea, exemplary character, non-initiation of the corrupt system, loss of employment, first case under the Ordinance) and the need for parity and proportionality in sentencing, the appellate court reduced the conspiracy sentence from three years to fifteen months and each of the other sentences from two years to twelve months, all to run concurrently, while allowing the restitution order of $49,000 to stand.

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. THAM CHEE SENG

ROBERT CHAN HING-CHEUNG v. THE QUEEN

STEPHEN LI SHUET-LO v. THE QUEEN