Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Use of vehicle without third party insurance

Legal area

Court

12 Oct 2018

香港特別行政區訴徐梓銘

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 2274
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA334/2018

The Court found no principled error in the sentencing judge's approach. The judge properly considered the appellant's use of another's identity as part of the fraud conduct, selected a 12-month starting point for sentencing, allowed a one-third reduction for an early plea, and ordered concurrent sentences. On that basis the 8-month immediate imprisonment on the revised fraud count and the other concurrent sentences were not manifestly excessive and the appeal was dismissed.
3 Oct 2016

HKSAR v. POON KWOK KIT

Citation

HKSAR v. POON KWOK KIT
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA111/2016

The amended charges were fatally duplicitous because each count encompassed distinct incidents occurring some 14 hours apart; this created unfairness by failing to identify the particular act relied upon for conviction. The magistrate should have raised the duplicity and the appellate court will not cure the defect by exercising s119 in a manner contrary to the rule on fairness; accordingly the appeal is allowed on that ground.
28 Jul 2016

HKSAR v. EJIOBU LAZARUS

Citation

HKSAR v. EJIOBU LAZARUS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA334/2016

The magistrate's starting points for each offence, the one-third reduction for guilty pleas and the decision to run custodial sentences concurrently were within principled sentencing bounds based on precedent and the facts; there were no valid grounds to disturb the sentences, so the appeal against sentence is dismissed.
14 Jul 2004

HKSAR v. TANG HING WONG

Citation

HKSAR v. TANG HING WONG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA433/2004

The magistrate lawfully exercised his fact‑finding function: he accepted PW1 as truthful and reliable, correctly treated PW3's differing parade identification as unimportant because prosecution did not rely on it and PW3 had only a brief view, and any minor inconsistencies did not render PW1's identification unsafe; there was no misdirection on burden of proof and the convictions were supported beyond reasonable doubt.
27 May 2004

HKSAR v. YIP SHU KAI

Citation

HKSAR v. YIP SHU KAI
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA897/2003

The appeal is dismissed because the Magistrate's detailed findings on credibility and fact were within his discretion, no substantive grounds of insufficiency, unfair trial or bias were established, and an appellate court will not re‑try evidence it was not in a position to assess directly.

Hong Kong Case Law

香港特別行政區 訴 徐梓銘

HKSAR v. POON KWOK KIT

HKSAR v. EJIOBU LAZARUS

HKSAR v. TANG HING WONG

HKSAR v. YIP SHU KAI

香港特別行政區訴徐梓銘