Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Dual criminality

Legal area

Court

16 Jul 2021

RAMANJIT SINGH alias ROMI v. THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDIA

Citation

[2021] HKCA 865
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC210/2020

Article 2(1)(xxxiv) is a catch-all clause: offences not expressly listed are extraditable provided they satisfy the two conditions in the clause (punishable by at least one year and surrender may be granted under the laws of both Parties). 'Escape from lawful custody' under Indian law (s224 IPC) meets those conditions and, because the acts would constitute offences under Schedule 1 (items 26 and 37) and satisfy s2(2) and s10(6)(b) of the FOO, it is a relevant offence for committal; appellant's appeal is dismissed and the matter is remitted to the magistrate to determine committal accordingly.
6 Nov 2019

RE KIM DOTCOM AND OTHERS

Citation

[2019] HKCA 885
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP123/2019

Leave to appeal was refused because the substantive grounds attacking the restraint order were not reasonably arguable: the Annex to the MLA(US)O validly exempts listed external offences (eg money‑laundering, racketeering) from dual criminality and, in any event, the US copyright offences pleaded satisfy Hong Kong dual criminality; although jurisdictional grounds on exclusivity were arguable, they did not render the substantive challenge sufficiently meritorious to justify leave.
29 Mar 2019

RE KIM DOTCOM AND OTHERS

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 843
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP116/2012

Application to discharge the 2012 Hong Kong restraint order was refused because the defendants' challenge amounted to an abuse of process: the SJ's executive decision to assist under the MLAO should have been challenged by judicial review; ancillary arguments on dual criminality and the HKBORO declarations were either resolved against the applicants on legal interpretation or were premature, and no relief was granted.
30 Jan 2014

RE RAFAT ALI RIZVI AND OTHERS

Citation

RE RAFAT ALI RIZVI AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2557/2010

The court held that the Indonesian court had jurisdiction to try the defendants in absentia under Indonesian law and the s28(1) criteria were satisfied (order in force, notice under Indonesian law, enforcement not contrary to interests of justice); dual criminality was satisfied; "realisable property" for enforcement of the external confiscation order is confined to property specified in the external confiscation order (Schedule 2 s5(1)(a)); accordingly the court registered and ordered enforcement of the external confiscation order in respect of specified Hong Kong accounts and appointed the…

Hong Kong Case Law

RAMANJIT SINGH alias ROMI v. THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDIA

RE KIM DOTCOM AND OTHERS

RE KIM DOTCOM AND OTHERS

RE RAFAT ALI RIZVI AND OTHERS