Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Evidentiary admissibility

  • 13 Dec 2023

    SRI WAHYUNI 對 林銳生

    Citation
    [2023] HKDC 1765
    Court
    District Court
    Case number
    DCEO4/2023

    The defendant failed to prove the requested recordings existed or that the claimant had possession, custody or control of them; the claimant's sworn denials were decisive; disclosure of the specified recordings was not shown to be necessary for fair disposal and amounted to a fishing expedition, so the court had no jurisdiction under Order 24 r 7 to make the order and the application was dismissed.

  • 15 Sept 2022

    CHOI SUN MING v. CREATIVE INTERIOR CONSTRUCTION LTD

    Citation
    [2022] HKDC 987
    Court
    District Court
    Case number
    DCEC783/2021

    Monthly earnings were accepted at $30,800 (1,400 x 22 days); applying multiplier 48 for age 58 and Board assessment of 3% resulted in s9 compensation $44,352; s10 compensation computed as $30,800 x 4/5 x 335/30 = $275,146.67; s10A medical expenses $2,764; total $322,262.67 less partial payments $189,280 yields net award $132,982.67; interest awarded from date of accident at half-judgment rate until judgment and judgment rate thereafter; respondent ordered to pay assessment costs $100,000.

  • 16 Nov 2018

    吳麗紅 對 梁淑嫻及另一人

    Citation
    [2018] HKDC 1403
    Court
    District Court
    Case number
    DCCJ2811/2016

    The cheque funds were paid by the plaintiff and deposited into the defendant's account (enrichment at claimant's expense); the subscription documents were forged and legally void so the plaintiff received no consideration (total failure of consideration); the defendant's claim that the funds were outstanding rent was unsupported by admissible evidence and implausible; therefore the enrichment was unjust and the defendant must restore HK$350,000 plus interest and costs.

  • 16 Sept 2011

    HKSAR v. XU SHENGQI

    Citation
    HKSAR v. XU SHENGQI<br>
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACC463/2010

    The judge's directions on the elements of murder and on defences were correct and adequately presented to the jury; the jury's unanimous murder verdicts were rationally supported by material differences in the causes and circumstances of death between victims so the differing verdict of manslaughter on one count was not inconsistent; the photographs were admissible as their probative value outweighed prejudice; and life sentences imposed by law could not be substituted on this appeal — accordingly applications for leave to appeal against conviction and to substitute determinate sentences were…

  • 14 Sept 2006

    TSO TAK KEUNG, EDDY v. SECRETARY FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE AND ANOTHER

    Citation
    TSO TAK KEUNG, EDDY v. SECRETARY FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE AND ANOTHER
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCAL28/2005

    The application for judicial review was dismissed because charge (a) in the disciplinary inquiry raised an additional material issue (unauthorised access under the Standing Order) not tried in the criminal count so section 15/autrefois acquit did not bar the disciplinary charge; the Inquiry Committee was not bound by criminal evidentiary exclusions under section 8 of the Public Service (Disciplinary) Regulation so admission of videotaped interviews was permissible for weight and did not amount to abuse of process or double jeopardy; issue estoppel was inapplicable because the employer was not…