Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Admissibility of identification

Legal area

Court

10 Feb 2022

HKSAR v. SINGH POPINDER AND OTHERS

Citation

[2022] HKCA 106
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC205/2020

Leave to appeal was refused because none of the grounds raised were reasonably arguable: the jury were entitled to accept the complainant's recognition evidence; the trial judge correctly exercised discretion to admit identification evidence and gave a comprehensive and fair summing‑up; the contested matters were factual or mixed law and fact and did not meet the threshold for leave.
18 Jul 2016

HKSAR v. CHEUNG WEN PO PHILIP

Citation

HKSAR v. CHEUNG WEN PO PHILIP
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA58/2016

Dock identifications were a material irregularity and the admissible identification evidence was weak and unreliable (fleeting glimpse, inconsistent witness descriptions, witnesses failed to recognize appellant during cross-examination, no identification parade and no evidence linking arrested person to the theft); absent reliable identification the convictions were unsafe and must be quashed and the sentence set aside.
30 Oct 1996

R v. HOANG DUC HOA AND OTHERS

Citation

R v. HOANG DUC HOA AND OTHERS
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC667/1995

The convictions were unsafe because the only identification evidence consisted of first-time dock identifications made nine months after the offences without prior parades or structured photo identification, witnesses had not made contemporaneous identifications or descriptions, photographs had been shown after arrest creating risk of contamination, and there was no other evidence to support conviction; accordingly appeals allowed and convictions quashed.

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. SINGH POPINDER AND OTHERS

HKSAR v. CHEUNG WEN PO PHILIP

R v. HOANG DUC HOA AND OTHERS