Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Evidence and inferences

Legal area

Court

19 Nov 2021

香港特別行政區訴黃淑珍及另一人

Citation

[2021] HKCA 1736
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC14/2020

On the facts the Court of Appeal acquitted D1 because the trial judge's inferences that she must have known of D2's reportable housing benefit were inadequately founded and alternative explanations (including private communications) were not excluded; D2's appeal was dismissed because objective and subjective elements of dishonesty were established: employer documents, payroll history and D2's admissions showed the payments were housing benefits and he knew the PTA double‑benefit rule and acted dishonestly to procure PTA, intending to deceive the Treasury and causing loss to the Government.
31 Jul 2020

香港特別行政區訴顏鎮邦

Citation

[2020] HKCA 671
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC328/2019

The judge lawfully rejected the defendant's account as implausible and, taking that rejection together with objective factors — the quantity and packaging of drugs, estimated market value, the defendant's conduct (not returning home), lack of credible explanation of purchase price and drug habit, and possession of multiple phones — reached the only reasonable conclusion that the drugs were possessed for supply; accordingly the leave application failed.
18 Apr 2019

WEALTH LEE FINANCE LTD v. NG FUN LUNG AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2019] HKDC 511
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ2060/2013

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed because the plaintiff failed to prove a causal link between the Loan and the discharge of the Wing Wui loan; without evidence of causation and with the burden on the plaintiff, the unjust enrichment claim has no reasonable prospect of success.
4 Nov 2013

THE SECRETARY OF THE MEDICAL COUNCIL OF HONG KONG v. THE MEDICAL COUNCIL OF HONG KONG DR FUONG RULIN

Citation

THE SECRETARY OF THE MEDICAL COUNCIL OF HONG KONG v. THE MEDICAL COUNCIL OF HONG KONG DR FUONG RULIN
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL116/2013

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the Medical Council did not err in law in concluding the charge was not proved: the admitted facts did not concede issuance of the receipt to a patient, the complainant's email and the physical state of the receipt were insufficient to establish issuance, and the Council was entitled to require more cogent evidence for the serious allegation; there was no reasonably arguable case with realistic prospects of success.
21 Nov 2012

HKSAR v. SHAWN HANNA

Citation

HKSAR v. SHAWN HANNA
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC26/2012

Once the trial judge properly rejected the appellant's evidence, the uncontradicted prosecution evidence established beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant, after becoming aware of the forged documents and denial of any relationship with Solazyme Inc, knowingly continued to assist and promote the fraudulent enterprise (including setting up and promoting Webs Private Equity), warranting conviction for conspiracy to defraud and affirmation of the 39 month sentence.
14 Apr 2011

LAI KEUNG v. JETWELL ENGINEERING CO AND OTHERS

Citation

LAI KEUNG v. JETWELL ENGINEERING CO AND OTHERS
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV179/2010

The Court of Appeal held that the contemporaneous written statements and statutory accident report signed by the defendants were reliable admissions from which, on the balance of probabilities, the court could infer that the plaintiff fell from the top of the ventilation unit while performing his work, establishing negligence and entitling the plaintiff to judgment for the assessed damages.
6 Jan 2009

ANBEST ELECTRONIC LTD v. CGU INTERNATIONAL INSURANCE PLC

Citation

ANBEST ELECTRONIC LTD v. CGU INTERNATIONAL INSURANCE PLC
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV123/2008

The judge's factual findings — that three original bills were received by the bank, that one was dishonestly passed to First Star, and that forwarding from Khor Fakkan to Sharjah was part of a pre-planned theft — justified treating the loss as occurring when the container left Khor Fakkan; under clauses 8 and 9 and the policy's additional schedule the insurance had not terminated and thus the loss was covered, so the appeal failed.
15 Apr 2003

HKSAR v. CHEUNG YIU KWAN

Citation

HKSAR v. CHEUNG YIU KWAN
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA81/2003

The appellate court upheld the convictions because the magistrate's acceptance of credible eyewitness evidence and the reasonable inference drawn from the appellant's presence near the alley and the presence of his wallet in the victim's handbag established the actus and mens rea of theft, and the appellant was not so intoxicated as to lack specific intent; the assault conviction was supported by direct evidence. On sentencing the court reduced the assault term as excessive and adjusted concurrency to achieve an overall totality of 16 months' imprisonment.
8 Dec 1999

HKSAR v. IP CHI KEUNG

Citation

HKSAR v. IP CHI KEUNG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA943/1999

The appeal court found the Magistrate erred in relying on environmental harm and an inference that the oil was smuggled when the provenance was not proved; although the offence properly falls within duty-evasion sentencing principles and prevalence can justify custody, the improper factual basis rendered the immediate custodial sentence excessive and it was substituted with a suspended sentence of six weeks imprisonment for two years.
16 Mar 1993

Yeung Wai-chun v. R.

Citation

Yeung Wai-chun v. R.
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC446/1992

The appellate court held the deputy judge was entitled to infer that the drugs were possessed for trafficking based on quantity, retail-style packaging and unusual storage, and that the sentence was within the applicable Lau Tak Ming guideline range and not excessive; accordingly leave to appeal against conviction and sentence was refused.