Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Evidence and credibility findings

Legal area

Court

12 Mar 2025

香港特別行政區訴陳興濤

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 998
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA369/2024

Appellate court accepted the trial judge's credibility findings and objective facts that the premises operated as an open restaurant and that the appellant provided an opened bottle of wine and cups after accepting payment; those facts satisfied the elements of unlicensed sale/possession for sale under Cap.109 beyond reasonable doubt, so conviction is upheld; sentencing was mitigated due to small scale and appellant's circumstances and the fine was reduced to HK$2,000 payable within three months.
30 Aug 2021

HKSAR v. DANIEL PIKE

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 2564
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA555/2019

The magistrate's credibility findings were plainly wrong and he failed to properly analyse the law of self‑defence; on rehearing the court finds the appellant acted in reasonable self‑defence of his young children and quashes the AOABH conviction and sentence; on the separate poison charge the prosecution failed to rebut the lawful possession inference from the appellant's medical/prescription evidence so the conviction and sentence are also set aside.
2 Dec 2010

DR. SIU TING WING v. THE MEDICAL COUNCIL OF HONG KONG

Citation

DR. SIU TING WING v. THE MEDICAL COUNCIL OF HONG KONG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV130/2008

The Court upheld the Medical Council’s finding that the appellant had, by his conduct and the totality of evidence, prescribed the medicines and, having failed to examine the patient, advise on side effects, and ensure required labelling, fell below the standard expected of a registered medical practitioner; those failings constituted professional misconduct and justified the Council’s disciplinary orders.
7 Oct 2009

HKSAR v. LEE LAI KIT KITTY

Citation

HKSAR v. LEE LAI KIT KITTY
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC379/2008

The conviction was upheld because the trial judge's acceptance of the prosecution witnesses and rejection of the applicant's account on credibility grounds was justified and not open to interference; however the sentence was reduced from 3 years 6 months to 3 years 2 months because the court gave weight to partial repayment by a third party, the single-transaction nature of the offence and other mitigating considerations, resulting in an approximate 10% reduction.

Hong Kong Case Law

香港特別行政區 訴 陳興濤

HKSAR v. DANIEL PIKE

DR. SIU TING WING v. THE MEDICAL COUNCIL OF HONG KONG

HKSAR v. LEE LAI KIT KITTY

香港特別行政區訴陳興濤