Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Expert evidence admissibility

Legal area

Court

7 May 2026

HKSAR v. CHEN KEEN (alias JACK CHEN) AND OTHERS

Citation

[2026] HKCA 937
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC228/2023

Majority held convictions quashed for D1 and D2 on Count 1 and for D1, D2 and D3 on Counts 2 and 4. Counts 2 and 4 were unsafe because the prosecution conceded it could not prove actual concealment of Tab 11 and materially changed its case, causing unfairness and depriving defence of effective challenge. Count 1 required the jury to be directed on the Listing Rules context and meaning of 'connected'/'independent'/'relationship' before truth/falsity could be assessed; absence of adequate direction made convictions unsafe and warranted quashing. Convictions on Count 3 (conspiracy to defraud 462…
23 Sept 2025

WONG WING HEI v. THE INCORPORATED MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE OF TIN SHUI WAI METHODIST COLLEGE

Citation

[2025] HKDC 1616
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEO14/2023

The court granted the respondents' applications to adduce Professor Alan Cheung's expert report, holding that the subject matter (conventional school dress and appearance) is within an area where expert assistance may be needed, Professor Cheung is suitably qualified and the proposed issues are relevant to the pleaded packaging defence; the claimant's application to admit psychiatric evidence was dismissed as the proposed issues were overbroad and not shown to be necessary or relevant to the pleaded indirect discrimination claim. The court directed claimants may file any expert reply within 2…
27 Feb 2025

黃錦賢對蕭玉良及另一人

Citation

[2025] HKDC 292
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ5107/2017

Defendants were precluded from adducing expert or witness evidence for quantification because they failed to comply with the court's directions; plaintiff's expert evidence and contractor quotation were found credible and showed reasonable reinstatement cost; plaintiff entitled to reinstatement damages of HKD440,000; furniture and appliances claims lacked documentary corroboration and were dismissed; defendants jointly and severally liable for HKD440,000 plus interest from 16 November 2017 at HSBC prime +1% until judgment then at judgment rate; defendants to pay plaintiff's costs and plaintif…
20 Feb 2025

RE TIANJI HOLDING LTD

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 765
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW637/2024

The statutory demand complied with the rules and provided adequate particulars; Tianji cannot establish a bona fide dispute on substantial grounds because it had expressly admitted the intercompany indebtedness in the ES and supporting financial statements on which creditors and the court relied; the adduced expert PRC opinion was irrelevant and filed without leave and was expunged; accordingly Tianji is insolvent and a winding-up order was properly made and costs reserved with directions to join Chen for the purposes of costs.
21 Jan 2025

SINO DATABASE LTD AND ANOTHER v. ABERDEEN BOAT CLUB LTD

Citation

[2025] HKDC 154
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3404/2021

The 2nd Plaintiff's summonses for adducing expert evidence and for specific discovery were dismissed as inordinate, inexcusable and abusive given the imminent trial, the absence of justification for the delay, and the real prejudice and disruption to the Defendant and court; leave was granted only for a minor amendment and admission of the supplemental witness statement (excluding the expert report) due to the Defendant's concession; the trial dates remain fixed; the 2nd Plaintiff was ordered to pay the Defendant's costs on an indemnity basis.
11 Jul 2024

HKSAR v. LI CHEUNG CHOI (李長再)

Citation

[2024] HKCFA 20
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FAMC16/2023

Leave to appeal was granted only on the point whether statements of an accused to a medical practitioner are hearsay and the effect on admissibility of the expert's opinion; the remainder of the application was dismissed because there was no reasonable argument that the trial judge or Court of Appeal were wrong to conclude there was insufficient evidential basis to require a jury direction on suicide pact and no substantial and grave injustice arose.
2 May 2024

J, S aka SSJ v. J, ICV aka ICVJ

Citation

[2024] HKFC 90
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC12707/2019

The Judge dismissed the appeal because the Master’s refusal to order a SIR and SJE was a defensible case management decision not clearly wrong: the appellant failed to show those reports were necessary, relevant and sufficiently probative to justify delay; it was impractical to obtain reliable reports within the short time before trial; and the appellant’s delay in bringing the application made postponement unfair and prejudicial to the agreed relocation timetable.
5 Apr 2024

SECURITIES AND FUTURES COMMISSION v. CHENG WAI TAK AND OTHERS

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 961
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1575/2019

Leave to adduce expert evidence on the alleged general 'custom' (Amended Question 1) is refused because the subject matter is not a recognised body of knowledge, the proposed expert’s qualification was not demonstrated, and the issue was not pleaded; leave to adduce expert evidence on the feasibility, advantages/disadvantages, mitigation measures and estimated proceeds of the three specified disposal methods (Amended Question 2) is granted because those questions fall within a recognised field of 'securities and assets realization', are relevant to pleaded disputes and necessary to assist the…
19 Oct 2023

MCYP v. CWYW

Citation

[2023] HKCA 1196
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV413/2022

The Court of Appeal held the Judge erred to dismiss the summons solely because FY's unsigned notes were treated as inadmissible under Order 38 r.37C(1); those notes were admissible at the interlocutory application stage and s.47(1) Evidence Ordinance meant absence of objection defeated exclusion. On the merits, the necessity threshold for non-party discovery was not met for broad, intrusive requests or for documents of a listed company, but was met in a limited and proportionate way: detailed breakdowns of liabilities (Category 1) were rejected; discovery of non-current asset valuation materi…
29 Sept 2023

CHAN KAI YAN AND ANOTHER v. LEUNG CHI KIT AND OTHERS

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 2410
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2498/2014

The court exercised its case management discretion under Order 38 r 4A to permit the expert opinion evidence already provided in HCA 1357/2012 to stand also as evidence in HCA 2498/2014 because the evidence was relevant to common issues between the actions and the trial timetable (expert tranche in March 2024) afforded sufficient time for defendants to obtain responsive expert reports; the defendants were granted leave to adduce responsive expert evidence and the parties were directed to agree a generous timetable and convene expert meetings and a joint report; costs reserved.