Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Conditional immunity

Legal area

Court

29 May 2009

HKSAR v. CHONG CHI HO

Citation

HKSAR v. CHONG CHI HO
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC259/2008

The convictions were safe because the trial judge properly evaluated and cautioned about accomplice evidence given under conditional immunity, legitimately relied on documentary corroboration for non-hearsay purposes (supported by bankers' affirmations and statutory admissions), and there was no legal obligation to treat omissions as perjury or to give special warnings about privilege absent specific evidential circumstances; therefore leave to appeal was refused and convictions upheld.
16 Jun 1987

THE QUEEN v. WAI CHI NAM AND OTHERS

Citation

THE QUEEN v. WAI CHI NAM AND OTHERS
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC384/1986

Independent evidence may corroborate accomplice testimony even if the connection to the accused is established by reference to that testimony; corroboration that sufficiently connects one accused cannot be generalized to others; Crown's failure to disclose documents relevant to conditional immunity amounted to a material irregularity under s.83(1)(c) CPO, but where no miscarriage of justice occurred the proviso to s.83(1) permits dismissal of appeals dependent solely on that irregularity.
10 Apr 1987

THE QUEEN v. TSUI LAI YING AND OTHERS

Citation

THE QUEEN v. TSUI LAI YING AND OTHERS
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC406/1985

The Court held the Attorney General possessed power (prerogative and common law, supplemented by statutory provisions) to grant conditional immunities and that judicial inquiry into such executive discretion is permissible only in exceptional cases; on the facts the trial judge did not err in admitting the immunised accomplice evidence generally, but material misdirections occurred in treating statutory presumptions as corroboration, rendering convictions of D3, D4 and D11 unsafe — those convictions were quashed and retrials ordered on the substantive possession counts; appeals of D1, D6, D8…
14 Aug 1975

NG SIK-HO @ PAI HO AND OTHERS v. THE QUEEN

Citation

NG SIK-HO @ PAI HO AND OTHERS v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC410/1975

The Full Court held the trial judge did not err in admitting accomplice evidence given conditional immunity nor in his general directions on corroboration and credibility; the jury were adequately warned and the convictions of the first, second, fourth, fifth, seventh, eighth and ninth appellants were safe. However, due to material misdirection and insufficiency of evidence the convictions of the third and sixth appellants were unsafe and set aside; one sentence (fifth appellant) was reduced for disproportionate punishment.

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. CHONG CHI HO

THE QUEEN v. WAI CHI NAM AND OTHERS

THE QUEEN v. TSUI LAI YING AND OTHERS

NG SIK-HO @ PAI HO AND OTHERS v. THE QUEEN