Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Unsafe conviction on appeal

Legal area

Court

17 Feb 2017

HKSAR v. KOTECHA, KRISHNA RAJESH

Citation

HKSAR v. KOTECHA, KRISHNA RAJESH
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA502/2016

The appeal was allowed because on rehearing the court was not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the touching was deliberate and that the appellant had the intention to indecently assault; the trial magistrate had not given sufficient consideration and reasons in relation to the appellant's unchallenged character evidence and the real possibility of accidental contact, rendering the conviction unsafe and liable to be set aside.
9 Oct 1998

HKSAR v. NG CHING YI AND ANOTHER

Citation

HKSAR v. NG CHING YI AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA33/1998

Convictions were quashed because the magistrate wrongly or insufficiently evaluated key evidence: admissions to persons in authority were not properly assessed for voluntariness and may have been inadmissible or mischaracterised; the written contract and surrounding facts did not establish beyond reasonable inference an unlawful agreement or requisite knowledge by the second appellant; the prosecution failed to overcome reasonable explanations and evidence of openness, rendering convictions unsafe.
16 Apr 1998

HKSAR v. LAM SUI KWONG

Citation

HKSAR v. LAM SUI KWONG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA1021/1997

The conviction was quashed because the appellate court found a lurking doubt arising from shortcomings in the trial magistrate's handling and evaluation of evidence—notably insufficient independent analysis of whether the touching was indecent, unaddressed assumptions by the complainant, potential procedural errors (including leading questions) and apparent pre-judgment—rendering the conviction unsafe and unsatisfactory.
12 Sept 1980

YIU SHUI-CHUEN v. THE QUEEN

Citation

YIU SHUI-CHUEN v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC660/1980

The conviction was unsafe because the prosecution relied on an ambiguous interview record that failed to establish when or whether a concluded agreement to bribe was made; the trial magistrate erred in reconstructing a conversation from fragmented answers, and therefore the Crown did not prove the conspiracy beyond reasonable doubt.
6 Apr 1976

HO WING KEUNG v. THE QUEEN

Citation

HO WING KEUNG v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC277/1976

Conviction was unsafe and unsatisfactory because the magistrate dismissed a sustained, detailed defence as a 'mere denial' without giving reasons, relied on a sole, uncorroborated police witness despite multiple officers being present and failed properly to account for inherent improbabilities in the prosecution account; conviction therefore set aside and costs returned.

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. KOTECHA, KRISHNA RAJESH

HKSAR v. NG CHING YI AND ANOTHER

HKSAR v. LAM SUI KWONG

YIU SHUI-CHUEN v. THE QUEEN

HO WING KEUNG v. THE QUEEN