27 Feb 2024
The court granted an appeal aid certificate under Rule 12(3) Cap 221 to provide the applicant with legal representation in the leave application so counsel can properly test whether there is a reasonably arguable ground of appeal arising from the Judge's concluding comment in the summing-up and from outstanding inquiries about the airline ticket and passport details.
5 Oct 2023
The court found on the facts that the Flats are subject to a charitable trust for the advancement of Christianity but declined to grant a declaration of trust because not all interested parties were before the court and the remedy had not been submitted at trial.
16 Dec 2021
Bail pending appeal granted because the applicant's first ground — that the absence of the employer's principal from the witness box may have led the judge to rely on inadmissible or insufficient hearsay and unsupported findings about her knowledge — made the appeal reasonably arguable and afforded a real chance of success; the exceptional test for bail on the merit ground was therefore satisfied in respect of that point.
18 Jun 2020
The bail application was dismissed because the applicant could not demonstrate a realistic prospect of success on appeal (notably grounds dependent on unavailable transcripts could not be assessed, and other grounds lacked merit), and the seriousness of the offence and length of sentence weighed against release pending appeal.
16 May 2019
The interpreter at trial lacked the necessary skill and experience to provide simultaneous court interpretation (admitting he could accurately interpret only about 20–30% and was unfamiliar with key legal terminology), and the cumulative deficiencies meant the applicant could not have had sufficient contemporaneous knowledge of the proceedings as required by Article 11(2)(f) of the Hong Kong Bill of Rights; accordingly the conviction was unsafe, must be quashed, sentence set aside and a retrial ordered.
16 Mar 2017
Because the legal or persuasive burden of proving due execution, testamentary capacity and knowledge and approval of the 2008 will lies on the defendant (William), Order 35 rule 7(6) entitles the defendant to begin and the court directs that William open and his witnesses give evidence first, with the specified sequence of witnesses and closings.
4 Nov 2016
The court's determination turned on the insufficiency and lack of proper authentication of the photocopied documents tendered to prove PRC permission to visit Hong Kong; because the plaintiff failed to adduce adequate authenticated evidence of the required permission the court decided the relevant issues on that basis.
9 Jan 2013
The court concluded the appellant was not prevented from calling the co-accused based on contemporaneous signed instructions and affirmations from counsel and the solicitor's clerk; further, the circumstantial evidence (telephone communications, knowledge of site security, timing of events, and direction of vehicles) was sufficient to establish the appellant's participation in the conspiracy to rob, so the appeal against conviction failed.
5 Oct 2012
The magistrate, having heard all witnesses, properly found the admissions were made and voluntary and made factual credibility findings; those findings are factual determinations that the appellate court will not disturb absent clear error, and no such error was shown; therefore the conviction was safe and the appeal is dismissed.
4 Oct 2012
裁判官在無充分事實基礎下以上訴人所謂之自招嫌疑拒絕訟費，惟控方當日已掌握回泥工序及有工人在場之關鍵事實且並無被隱瞞，控方亦未向上訴人追詢所需細節，故裁判官誤用酌情權。上訴得直，命上訴人獲審訊及上訴之訟費。