Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Forfeiture procedure

  • 12 Oct 2018

    香港特別行政區 訴 安傑威

    Citation
    [2018] HKCA 651
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACC374/2017

    Despite procedural deficiencies in how the trial judge handled the forfeiture hearing and the failure to spell out reasons, the court found the agreed facts (suspicious conduct at night, possession of substantial quantity of drugs, multiple mobile phones and HK$44,352.90) furnished a prima facie link under s56 DDO; the prosecution met its civil burden and the appellant neither effectively opposed the forfeiture nor adduced evidence to rebut the prima facie case, so the forfeiture order for HK$44,352.90 was properly made and is upheld.

  • 10 Jun 2016

    HKSAR v. IRUMAH IBE BEN

    Citation
    HKSAR v. IRUMAH IBE BEN
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCCC155/2016

    The court found a prima facie connection between the US$3,250 and the defendant's drug trafficking: the defendant was in financial difficulties, participated as a drug courier for reward, his account of the cash provenance was not credible, and on the balance of probabilities the money was used in or resulted from the drug trafficking; accordingly the sum was forfeitable under both limbs of s56(1) and ordered forfeited to the Government.

  • 16 Mar 1995

    R. v. CHAN MAN CHI and Others

    Citation
    R. v. CHAN MAN CHI and Others
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACC20/1994

    Where an appellant voluntarily surrendered and provided substantial, credible assistance and evidence at real risk to himself and his family, the Court will treat such a defendant as within the 'supergrass' category and allow a discount up to two-thirds of an appropriate starting point; applied to facts, A1 qualified for two-thirds reduction, A2 and A3 merited greater discounts than imposed by trial judge, A4 did not and his appeal was refused; starting points adopted by trial judge were appropriate in each case given gravity and aggravating features.

  • 16 Mar 1995

    R. v. CHAN MAN CHI and Others

    Citation
    R. v. CHAN MAN CHI and Others
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACC18/1994

    The court held that where a defendant voluntarily surrenders and gives significant, dangerous assistance to the police he may fall within the 'supergrass' category meriting up to a two-thirds reduction; applying that principle, A1's sentences were reduced from 12 to 8 years concurrent (two-thirds of a 24-year starting point), A2's sentences on specified counts were reduced from 20 to 15 years, A3's concurrent sentences were reduced from 16 to 12 years, and A4's application was refused because the judge's discount was within reasonable discretion; the forfeiture order was not determined by thi…

  • 16 Mar 1995

    R. v. CHAN MAN CHI and Others

    Citation
    R. v. CHAN MAN CHI and Others
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACC21/1994

    Court allowed appeals in part: Chan Man-chi (A1) qualified as a 'supergrass' and sentence reduced from 12 to 8 years concurrent (two-thirds of 24 years starting point); Chan Kin-chung (A2) entitled to greater discount and sentences on counts 2,3 and 5-14 reduced from 20 to 15 years; Choy Sze-man (A3) entitled to greater discount for early plea, cooperation and having given evidence, sentences reduced from 16 to 12 years concurrent; Ho Shu-wing (A4) appeal refused. Court confirmed imitation firearms are to be treated the same as genuine firearms for sentencing and reiterated that discount leve…