Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Adverse inference from silence

Legal area

Court

28 Jan 2025

香港特別行政區訴鍾錦聰及另二人

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 411
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA479/2023

The court, conducting a rehearing, accepted the restaurant manager’s and police evidence that the first and second appellants worked in the kitchen for sustained periods with corroborating work‑card and payment evidence, and that the third appellant arranged and engaged them; inconsistencies and omissions were not sufficient to create reasonable doubt; therefore convictions were safe and appeals dismissed.
3 Jan 2025

香港特別行政區訴馮健如

Citation

[2025] HKCA 43
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC269/2024

Bail was refused because the appeal did not have a realistic prospect of success given the cogent evidence (CCTV footage, D1's confession and the applicant's recorded admissions) and because the trial judge's adverse inference from the applicant's silence was reasonable and unassailable on the material before the court.
14 Jun 2022

香港特別行政區訴蔡裕文

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 1578
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA601/2021

The court held that the presence of the appellant's two fingerprints on the letter inside a sealed, addressed envelope that contained drugs, together with the letter's wording and absence of other fingerprints or explanation, permitted the irresistible inference that the appellant wrote, packaged and sent the envelope; therefore the conviction was safe.
30 Jun 2021

香港特別行政區訴官心陽

Citation

[2021] HKCA 916
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC349/2019

The appellate court held the trial judge’s factual findings were supported by the evidence and that the only reasonable and irresistible inference was that the applicant jointly possessed the drugs in the hotel room for trafficking; there was no misdirection on joint possession and the renewed application for leave to appeal was refused, upholding the conviction.
26 Jan 2021

YAU LAI WAH v. WONG KAN YU

Citation

[2021] HKCA 119
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV133/2020

The Court of Appeal upheld the Recorder's factual findings: the plaintiff failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that HK$3,000,000 was a loan from her to the defendant; the Recorder properly assessed inherent probabilities and contemporaneous documents and was entitled to decline to draw an adverse inference from the defendant's failure to give oral evidence; the burden of proof remained on the plaintiff because the defendant denied the loan; the appeal was dismissed.
15 Oct 2020

CHAN SZE WING v. CONGRUENCE CHINESE MEDICINE & JING LUO HEALTH LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 2596
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA866/2012

On the balance of probabilities the Company (acting by its sole director/shareholder TPC) transferred the Property with the intention to defraud a prospective creditor; the transfer was at a gross undervalue, occurred in circumstances (timing, family relationship, inconsistent and unproved payment evidence, non-production of material witnesses and documents) from which intent to defraud may be inferred; the transferee failed to prove she provided valuable consideration in good faith and without notice; accordingly the Assignment is voidable under s.60 CPO and must be set aside; restoration ex…
21 Aug 2020

香港特別行政區訴朱凱欣及另一人

Citation

[2020] HKCA 701
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC171/2018

Leave refused because the trial judge's factual findings on credibility, supported by documentary and banking evidence and by D3's independent testimony, were not perverse; inferences drawn against A1 and A2 about control of accounts and reasonable grounds to believe funds were proceeds were properly open to the judge, and the sentencing approach was not plainly wrong.
1 Aug 2019

HKSAR v. CHAN ERNEST

Citation

[2019] HKCA 869
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC191/2018

The judge correctly assessed the facts and legal principles: there was no realistic basis to conclude the oral admission was induced by oppression beyond those matters already addressed; the judge gave appropriate Mushtaq directions where required in relation to the notebook entry and the video interview; directions regarding refusal to answer and the evidential status of statements under s65B were adequate; the grounds lacked merit and leave to appeal was refused.
21 Jun 2018

HKSAR v. DAVINDER SINGH

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 1668
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA167/2018

The Magistrate was entitled to draw the adverse inference from the appellant's failure to give evidence in the context of convincing circumstantial facts (presence at Ladies Market with canvas at stall-setup time and an admitted removal order) so that the prosecution established the elements of section 38AA(1)(b) and (2) beyond reasonable doubt; therefore the conviction stands.
2 Jun 2017

香港特別行政區訴田方裕

Citation

香港特別行政區訴田方裕
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA524/2016

The magistrate's credibility and factual findings were rational and supported by the evidence; she did not base conviction on a 'not proven' principle but on the sole reasonable inference available from the uncontradicted evidence that the appellant's driving fell below the standard of a careful driver; the appellant's decision not to give evidence or call witnesses justified drawing an adverse inference; conviction was therefore safe and is affirmed.