Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Credibility and appellate review

Legal area

Court

31 Jul 2024

香港特別行政區訴李惠宏

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 2960
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA281/2023

The trial judge properly accepted the complainant's consistent oral evidence and the contemporaneous WhatsApp messages constituted a clear threat to publish intimate images without consent; there was no basis to overturn the judge's credibility findings on appeal; the prosecution proved the offence beyond reasonable doubt and the sentence of 4 months imprisonment suspended for 24 months was not excessive.
4 Dec 2023

RAINBOW MORTGAGE SERVICES LTD 對 LI MAN LAI

Citation

[2023] HKCA 1321
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV42/2023

The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's factual findings and dismissed the appeal on the substantive liability: the loan agreement was valid, the defendant was liable for HK$943,000 and contractual interest at 30% p.a. was enforceable; however, because the effective claim fell within Regional Court limits and no complex issues justified retention by the High Court, the trial costs are to be assessed according to the Regional Court scale and by summary (simplified) procedure as ordered by the Court of Appeal.
6 Oct 2021

HAO TIAN FINANCE CO LTD v. HUNG YUK MING AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2021] HKCA 1473
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV130/2020

The Court upheld the trial judge's credibility and factual findings: the defendants' account was inherently improbable and contradicted by contemporaneous bilingual loan documents and the accounting for all loan proceeds; there was no reliable evidence of collusion between the plaintiff and intermediaries; the trial judge did not err in law nor make plainly wrong factual findings; therefore the appeal is dismissed.
9 Nov 2020

HKSAR v. TSEDEV ALIMAA

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 2772
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA64/2019

The magistrate's adverse credibility findings were reasonable and supported by the evidence (expulsion from the employer's home, cessation of salary, ability to secure accommodation elsewhere); the irresistible inference was that the appellant knew her contract had been terminated, therefore the conviction for breach of condition of stay was safe and was confirmed on appeal.
27 May 2020

香港特別行政區訴孫國榮

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 931
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA562/2019

Appellant's act of placing two bags of rubbish on the pavement constituted the statutory offence; his belief or good motive was merely a misunderstanding of the law and is not a defence; appellate court will not overturn the trial judge's credibility findings absent error, therefore conviction is upheld.
8 Apr 2020

香港特別行政區訴鄭洲

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 504
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA344/2019

The trial judge properly accepted the complainant’s account, the dashcam footage and the appellant’s own confirmations (including the signed driver identity statement and in‑court admission) as sufficient evidence that the appellant was the driver who crossed the continuous white line on 13 August; there was no error warranting overturning the conviction.
22 Dec 2017

香港特別行政區訴潘志輝

Citation

香港特別行政區訴潘志輝
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA259/2016

The P4 form required declaration of monthly (fixed) income; a one‑off casual payment of HK$1,440 was not a fixed monthly income and, interpreted by the form wording and the Housing Authority's own guidance, need not be declared as current monthly income. Non‑disclosure of that one‑off sum therefore did not amount to a false statement, and the conviction could not stand.
7 Jul 2014

CHOW SAU HEI v. HO KEUNG YUEN AND ANOTHER

Citation

CHOW SAU HEI v. HO KEUNG YUEN AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV112/2013

The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's factual findings and credibility assessments as supported by contemporaneous documents, inherent probabilities and the overall evidence; despite an unreasonable delay in judgment the record did not show errors attributable to delay that made the judgment unsafe; petitioner failed to prove oppressive conduct or exclusion from management under s168A and the judge's dismissal and indemnity costs order were affirmed.
22 Nov 2013

HKSAR v. CHONG KA HAI, KEEFE AND OTHERS

Citation

HKSAR v. CHONG KA HAI, KEEFE AND OTHERS
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC411/2012

The appeals were dismissed because the central misrepresentation — that a substantial company existed and would protect capital — was proven false; D1's admissions and the conduct of D1 and D2 established the necessary fraudulent intent (repayments did not negate intent); and the pattern of deposits and rapid withdrawals from D3's account provided reasonable grounds to believe the funds were proceeds of an indictable offence, supporting conviction under Cap 455 s25.
12 Jul 2013

香港特別行政區訴王仲偉

Citation

香港特別行政區訴王仲偉
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA760/2012

The trial judge evaluated credibility, noted and dealt with inconsistencies, considered and rejected the appellant's honest belief defence based on the incremental and deliberate nature of the contact and surrounding conduct, and concluded the evidence sufficed to prove intentional indecent assault beyond reasonable doubt; therefore the conviction is safe and the appeal is dismissed.