Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Desuetude

  • 6 Jul 2012

    WINNIE LO v. HKSAR

    Citation
    WINNIE LO v. HKSAR
    Court
    Court of Final Appeal
    Case number
    FACC2/2011

    The appellant is entitled to costs here and below because the prosecution relied on erroneous and unjustified adverse inferences rather than any conduct by the appellant that legitimately attracted suspicion; although the appellant lost two ancillary legal points, those points were properly arguable and the bulk of the appeal concerned the successful ground, so no deduction of costs is warranted; a certificate for three counsel is refused because three counsel were not justified.

  • 23 Feb 2012

    WINNIE LO v. HKSAR

    Citation
    WINNIE LO v. HKSAR
    Court
    Court of Final Appeal
    Case number
    FACC2/2011

    The court held that maintenance and champerty are sufficiently certain to be constitutionally valid, but quashed the appellant's conviction because the evidence did not support an irresistible inference that a solicitor who acted in a professional capacity knowingly conspired to commit maintenance or abetted champerty; convictions cannot rest on mischaracterisations of proper professional conduct or on inferences drawn from irrelevant or exculpatory facts.