Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Stay of prosecution

Legal area

Court

25 Jun 2009

YEUNG CHUN PONG AND OTHERS v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE

Citation

YEUNG CHUN PONG AND OTHERS v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FACC8/2008

The Court held the Hong Kong prosecution did not arise from the same or substantially the same set of facts as the Macanese trial because the accounts, periods, sums and racing seasons differed and any overlap was insignificant; no inconsistency would result from a conviction in Hong Kong given the Macanese acquittal; therefore the stay was properly refused and the appeals were dismissed with costs.
25 Sept 2008

YEUNG CHUN PONG AND OTHERS v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE

Citation

YEUNG CHUN PONG AND OTHERS v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FAMC33/2008

The Court certified the three legal questions as points of law of great and general importance and granted leave to appeal under the point of law limb of s.32(2); it declined to grant leave under the substantial and grave injustice limb while recording that the Interpol communication that the 74 account had been notified to Macau should be available to the Court of Final Appeal.
13 Jan 2006

HO HON CHUNG DANEL v. HKSAR

Citation

HO HON CHUNG DANEL v. HKSAR
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FAMC77/2005

Leave to appeal was refused because the re-trial did not constitute an abuse of process attributable solely to the prosecution (defence counsel shared responsibility for appellate error), and there was ample evidence to justify the judge's inference of absence of consent (physical characteristics of discs, expert witness evidence and the finding that the purported authorization was bogus), so no substantial and grave injustice was shown.
31 Aug 2005

HKSAR v. YEUNG CHUN PONG AND OTHERS

Citation

HKSAR v. YEUNG CHUN PONG AND OTHERS
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCC438/2005

The plea of autrefois acquit fails because the Macao proceedings did not place the Accused in jeopardy for the Hong Kong offence alleged in the first charge: the Macao offence required an overt act and did not include the bank account (275-1-076-874) and time period alleged in the first Hong Kong charge; consequently the evidence necessary to secure a conviction on the Hong Kong charge would not have been sufficient to procure a conviction on the Macao charge. There is no evidence of prosecutorial mala fides or oppressive conduct warranting a stay; accordingly the prosecution of the first cha…
19 May 2005

THE DAIRY FARM CO LTD v. DIRECTOR OF FOOD AND ENVIRONMENTAL HYGIENE

Citation

THE DAIRY FARM CO LTD v. DIRECTOR OF FOOD AND ENVIRONMENTAL HYGIENE
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV283/2004

The Court of Appeal concluded the prosecution deliberately presented a distorted, partial case by withholding and failing to disclose material and thus broke faith with the court; because the prosecution's case depended solely on inference from absence of chops/stamps and could not be proved beyond reasonable doubt on the available evidence, continuation would constitute an abuse of process and a permanent stay was required; the magistrate's refusal without adequate reasons was quashed and the stay ordered.
11 May 2004

SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. CHEUNG CHUNG CHIT

Citation

SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. CHEUNG CHUNG CHIT
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV206/2003

The Court concluded the District Court judge erred in law by treating the out-of-jurisdiction witness statement as inadmissible without any section 65B objection having been served; because admissibility was not finally excluded the suggestion that a fair trial was impossible was premature and a permanent stay was not justified on that basis; the appeal was dismissed and costs were awarded to the applicant, while the court declined to interfere with the lower judge's exercise of discretion as to costs below.
22 Mar 2001

HKSAR v. LEE MING TEE AND ANOTHER

Citation

HKSAR v. LEE MING TEE AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FACC8/2000

The Court held that the Financial Secretary acting through his agents lawfully disclosed materials obtained under the Companies Ordinance to prosecuting authorities; s145(3A) validly abrogated the common law privilege and only prohibits direct use of compelled answers, and no free-standing common-law derivative use immunity exists; Article 11(2)(g) did not apply to the inspector interviews conducted before charges; despite improper official conduct and prejudicial publication, a fair trial remained possible with judicial remedies, therefore the permanent stay was wrongly ordered and must be s…
23 Aug 2000

HKSAR v. LAW YIK LUN

Citation

HKSAR v. LAW YIK LUN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC210/1999

The Court held the trial judge did not err: the defendant failed to show on the balance of probabilities that the unavailability of defence witnesses produced such serious prejudice that no fair trial could be held, and the judge's directions to the jury about delay, lost witnesses, alibi and forensic absence were adequate; the application for leave to appeal against conviction was dismissed.
23 Nov 1999

KWAN CHI ON v. KWAN TIT ON DANIEL AND ANOTHER

Citation

KWAN CHI ON v. KWAN TIT ON DANIEL AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV187/1999

The Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the refusal of leave because the applicant lacked a sufficient legal interest to challenge the Deputy Judge's decision to stay criminal proceedings; adverse judicial remarks do not confer standing on a non-party and judicial review cannot be used to obtain personal vindication in these circumstances.
7 Jul 1995

R. v. WONG CHUNG LING

Citation

R. v. WONG CHUNG LING
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCC395/1994

Although the prosecution's conduct and the resultant disclosures risked prejudicing the Defendant, the prejudice did not reach the exceptional level required to constitute an abuse of process; a retrial is permitted but should not be before the same judge who formed an opinion during the voir dire.