Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Foreign evidence

  • 27 Nov 2015

    HKSAR v. JARIABKA JURAJ

    Citation
    HKSAR v. JARIABKA JURAJ
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACC321/2014

    Leave to appeal was granted on two principal grounds: (1) it is reasonably arguable that no offence capable of being incited was established because the relevant property (future bank deposits) did not exist at the time and the conduct may have been merely preparatory; (2) it is reasonably arguable that the prosecution did not prove that the monies to be deposited would be proceeds of an indictable offence. Leave to appeal against sentence was granted because it is reasonably arguable sentencing for an inchoate offence requires assessment of proven conduct and potential harm and that the judg…

  • 20 Apr 2010

    PENG FENGSHENG v. WONG TAK HUNG

    Citation
    PENG FENGSHENG v. WONG TAK HUNG
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA1336/2009

    Defendant failed to establish that Hong Kong is not the natural or appropriate forum or that the Guangzhou court is clearly or distinctly more appropriate; the defendant's evidential case did not show that crucial documentary or witness matters were exclusively for the Mainland or that the plaintiff would be deprived of legitimate advantages; application to stay dismissed.

  • 20 Jan 1997

    CHIENG A LAC AND OTHERS v. THE DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND OTHERS

    Citation
    CHIENG A LAC AND OTHERS v. THE DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND OTHERS
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCMP3961/1996

    Hearsay in habeas corpus is not automatically inadmissible; where it is impracticable to produce primary evidence (because of passage of time or need to obtain evidence overseas), hearsay may be admitted and its reliability assessed by weight. However, evidence conveyed via interpreters must be treated as second‑hand hearsay and is admissible only if impracticable to obtain the primary evidence. Statements of opinion by a witness based on hearsay are not admissible as expert opinion under s.58(1). The court ruled specific passages and exhibits admissible or inadmissible accordingly.