Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Competence of witness

Legal area

Court

24 May 2024

GUANGDONG YINGGAO SHIPPING LTD (SUBSTITUTED BY ORDER OF MASTER HUI DATED 20 JANUARY 2021) v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE

Citation

[2024] HKCA 492
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP368/2023

Leave to appeal refused because the Judge correctly applied the legal tests: it was not plain and obvious that the defendant had failed to exchange the four witness statements and the factual disputes could not be resolved on affidavit; the absence of filing did not prove non‑exchange; Lui was competent to testify in his role and any hearsay affects weight not admissibility; the Judge's exercise of discretion was not plainly wrong.
1 Dec 2023

GUANGDONG YINGGAO SHIPPING LTD v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 3110
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1677/2015

Leave to appeal was refused because the Plaintiff failed to show it was plain and obvious that the Defendant never exchanged witness statements and failed to rebut the court's findings on veracity and facts supporting the competence of LSF; the absence of filed witness statements was not dispositive absent an order and the burden of proof rested on the Plaintiff.
6 Nov 2023

GUANGDONG YINGGAO SHIPPING LTD v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 2851
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1677/2015

The appeal was dismissed because the Plaintiff failed to show it was plain and obvious that the Defendant never exchanged the witness statements on 9 November 2016; the late hearsay account (Chin 4th) was rejected as unreliable; and LSF was held competent to give evidence as person in charge of the operation, so there was no basis to expunge his statement or strike out the Amended Defence.
17 Mar 2021

DAIMLER AG (formerly MERCEDES BENZ AG) v. HELGE HERBERT LEIDUCK, appointed by Order to represent the estate of HERBERT HEINZ HORST LEIDUCK, deceased AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2021] HKCA 328
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP102/2020

The Court refused leave to appeal because there was no reasonable prospect of success on grounds asserting the judge erred in allocating the burden under s3(b); the judge correctly applied legal principle that the party seeking admissibility must prove competence, her factual findings on fluctuating dementia and competence on specific dates were open to her on the evidence, and leave is refused on proportionality and interests of justice grounds.
2 Dec 2016

DAIMLER AG (formerly known as MERCEDES-BENZ AG) v. HELGE HERBERT LEIDUCK appointed by Order to represent the estate of HERBERT HEINZ HORST LEIDUCK, deceased AND ANOTHER

Citation

DAIMLER AG (formerly known as MERCEDES-BENZ AG) v. HELGE HERBERT LEIDUCK appointed by Order to represent the estate of HERBERT HEINZ HORST LEIDUCK, deceased AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA4089/1994

Section 3(b) of the Evidence Ordinance establishes a single competence test applicable to oral and written evidence; signing statements of truth verifying pleadings is not 'giving evidence' under s3(b); the inquiry into competence of written pretrial evidence is limited to whether the witness was of unsound mind and thereby appeared incapable of receiving just impressions or of relating them truly at the time the document was made (not by reference to a hypothetical crossexamination); on the evidence the court found Mr Leiduck was not of unsound mind in 2008–2010 (therefore his first five aff…
2 Jul 1982

YUNG KIT-MEI AND OTHERS v. THE QUEEN

Citation

YUNG KIT-MEI AND OTHERS v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC1025/1981

Where the only positive evidentiary link to the alleged conspiracy consisted of fingerprints on materials and there was no evidence of positive acts, the trial judge failed to direct the jury that they must infer active participation (not mere presence or knowledge) from the fingerprint evidence; that omission rendered the verdicts unsafe and the convictions were quashed.
26 Apr 1974

CHAN HING-CHEUNG AND OTHERS v. THE QUEEN

Citation

CHAN HING-CHEUNG AND OTHERS v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC579/1973

Having regard to Hong Kong's local circumstances, customary recognition of tsips/secondary wives, related local statutes and binding Privy Council authority, the court concluded that a woman in the position of a tsip is to be treated as a 'wife' for the purposes of s.6 Evidence Ordinance and is therefore incompetent to give evidence against her husband in criminal proceedings; because her evidence was material to the convictions the appeals were allowed and the convictions quashed.

Hong Kong Case Law

GUANGDONG YINGGAO SHIPPING LTD (SUBSTITUTED BY ORDER OF MASTER HUI DATED 20 JANUARY 2021) v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE

GUANGDONG YINGGAO SHIPPING LTD v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE

GUANGDONG YINGGAO SHIPPING LTD v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE

DAIMLER AG (formerly MERCEDES BENZ AG) v. HELGE HERBERT LEIDUCK, appointed by Order to represent the estate of HERBERT HEINZ HORST LEIDUCK, deceased AND ANOTHER

DAIMLER AG (formerly known as MERCEDES-BENZ AG) v. HELGE HERBERT LEIDUCK appointed by Order to represent the estate of HERBERT HEINZ HORST LEIDUCK, deceased AND ANOTHER

YUNG KIT-MEI AND OTHERS v. THE QUEEN

CHAN HING-CHEUNG AND OTHERS v. THE QUEEN