Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Conspiracy to deal with property

  • 25 Nov 2025

    HKSAR v. LEUNG KA MAN

    Citation
    [2025] HKCA 1055
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACC449/2025

    Extension of time to seek leave was granted; the applicant presented a reasonably arguable ground that his post-sentence testimony warrants an increased discount within a 40–50% range; accordingly leave to appeal and bail pending appeal were granted because the arguable appeal coupled with likely substantial time served justified bail.

    • Proceeds of crime
    • Conspiracy to deal with property
    • Assistance to prosecution
    • Sentence discount
    • Leave to appeal
    • Extension of time for filing

  • 5 Jun 2014

    HKSAR v. TSANG WAI LUN WAYLAND AND ANOTHER

    Citation
    HKSAR v. TSANG WAI LUN WAYLAND AND ANOTHER
    Court
    Court of Final Appeal
    Case number
    FACC6/2013

    The phrase "proceeds of an indictable offence" in s25(1) OSCO is confined to money or property that constitutes a benefit derived from the commission of the predicate offence; s2(6)(a) does not extend that phrase to cover clean funds merely used as instruments to further a crime; accordingly the prosecution failed to prove the essential "proceeds" element for Charge 4 and the convictions under that charge were quashed.

    • Meaning of "proceeds of an indictable offence"
    • Osco s25(1) construction
    • Osco s2(6)(a) interpretation
    • Section 25a reporting distinction
    • Conspiracy to deal with property
    • Benefit requirement for confiscation

  • 11 Jul 2013

    HKSAR v. LIU TJONG SLAM

    Citation
    HKSAR v. LIU TJONG SLAM
    Court
    Court of Final Appeal
    Case number
    FAMC8/2013

    Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant was correctly convicted on the alternative limb (reasonable grounds to believe) such that any challenge to the knowing limb would be academic, and because the total sentence of five years (4 years and 2 years with six months consecutive) was not excessive given the applicant's knowledge of the father's drug activities and the proximity of the facts to wilful blindness.

    • Money laundering
    • Conspiracy to deal with property
    • Section 25(1) osco
    • Knowing limb vs reasonable grounds to believe limb
    • Wilful blindness
    • Leave to appeal against conviction and sentence