Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Visa fraud

Legal area

Court

5 Oct 2005

HKSAR v. DAVID REYNALDO JR. GUMAMIT

Citation

HKSAR v. DAVID REYNALDO JR. GUMAMIT
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC246/2005

The Court upheld the District Court's sentence: a two-year immediate custodial term was appropriate and not manifestly excessive given the applicant's awareness and participation in a sophisticated international conspiracy to obtain visas using forged identity and travel documents, and given the need to protect the integrity of the immigration and visa systems.
12 Jun 2000

FERNANDO M RAMOS JR v. LA TRATTORIA RESTAURANT & BAR O/B LA TRATTORIA LTD.

Citation

FERNANDO M RAMOS JR v. LA TRATTORIA RESTAURANT & BAR O/B LA TRATTORIA LTD.
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA6152/1998

The court found the first appointment letter was a sham designed to procure an immigration visa and that the plaintiff was a participant in the deception; accordingly the first contract was void ab initio and unenforceable. The second contract was also illegal for breach of Immigration Laws and void. Plaintiff's claim for the shortfall was dismissed.
17 Mar 2000

HKSAR v. MAK KIN MING AND ANOTHER

Citation

HKSAR v. MAK KIN MING AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC302/1999

The Court held that the agreed facts and trial evidence established that the employment letters were material to the visa process and the applicants knew or believed them to be false and intended them to be acted on, that D6's handing over of tickets/boarding passes constituted aiding and abetting the false representation to immigration, and that admission of dock identification did not render the trial unfair; accordingly the convictions were safe and the appeals dismissed.
21 Apr 1999

HKSAR v. LAM MARILOUS ALIAS MENDOZA MARILOUS T.

Citation

HKSAR v. LAM MARILOUS ALIAS MENDOZA MARILOUS T.
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC34/1999

The Court upheld the trial judge's acceptance of the prosecution witness's evidence and the finding that the applicant arranged for phantom employers and thereby aided, abetted, counselled or procured false representations to the Immigration Department; there was no basis to interfere with the convictions.
30 Apr 1996

R. v. CHU MAN SANG

Citation

R. v. CHU MAN SANG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC6/1996

The Court held the judge was not wrong to adopt an 18-month starting point for this conspiracy; however the applicant was entitled to additional credit for the assistance he provided to the Immigration Department, and the sentence was reduced by three months accordingly.

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. DAVID REYNALDO JR. GUMAMIT

FERNANDO M RAMOS JR v. LA TRATTORIA RESTAURANT & BAR O/B LA TRATTORIA LTD.

HKSAR v. MAK KIN MING AND ANOTHER

HKSAR v. LAM MARILOUS ALIAS MENDOZA MARILOUS T.

R. v. CHU MAN SANG