Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Admissibility of co‑conspirator evidence

  • 14 Nov 2006

    HKSAR v. MO YUK PING AND ANOTHER

    Citation
    HKSAR v. MO YUK PING AND ANOTHER
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACC26/2006

    Conviction on Charge 1 was quashed because the trial judge failed to make express and material findings as to the conspirators' immediate intention (to induce outside investors) and their subjective appreciation/foresight of the risk of economic loss — elements central to the case as prosecuted — such omissions rendered the conviction unsafe. Conviction on Charge 2 was upheld because the judge made adequate findings that the conspirators intended to maintain price to avoid the Bank's differential and appreciated the risk to the Bank's economic rights. Conviction on Charge 3 was upheld because…

    • Conspiracy to defraud
    • Conspiracy to pervert the course of public justice
    • Mens rea and foresight
    • Vagueness/constitutional challenge
    • Admissibility of co-conspirator evidence
    • Appealable error in findings of fact

  • 4 Aug 1995

    R. v. HUNG HAK SING and Another

    Citation
    R. v. HUNG HAK SING and Another
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACC642/1994

    For the first applicant (Hung) the conviction under s.161 was unsafe and was quashed because the judge's own findings (access obtained as an act of friendship, no expectation of payment, unawareness of illegality) were inconsistent with a finding that access was "with a view to dishonest gain", and the judge could not properly treat unauthorised access to information as per se dishonest gain without reconciling those findings. For the second applicant (Choi) the conviction for conspiracy to solicit an advantage was upheld because the judge lawfully assessed the evidence, accepted PW4 and othe…

    • Unauthorised computer access
    • Dishonest gain
    • Conspiracy to solicit advantage
    • Admissibility of co‑conspirator evidence
    • Appeal against conviction

  • 23 Apr 1969

    CHAU SAU TAI AND OTHERS v. THE QUEEN

    Citation
    CHAU SAU TAI AND OTHERS v. THE QUEEN
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACC677/1968

    The proper approach is that the jury must consider the admissible evidence as a whole and decide in respect of each accused whether the evidence establishes beyond reasonable doubt that he was party to the unlawful agreement; acts or documents prepared in furtherance of the conspiracy by one conspirator may be admitted against others, but mere association is not enough to convict. Applying these principles, the convictions of the first, second and fourth appellants were supported by sufficient evidence, but the conviction of the third appellant was unsafe and must be quashed.

    • Conspiracy
    • Admissibility of co-conspirator evidence
    • Joint enterprise
    • Directions to jury
    • Sufficiency of evidence