7 Feb 2024
香港特別行政區 訴 潘惠英
- Citation
- [2025] HKCFI 2519
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCMA49/2023
在控方未傳召受影響之私家車司機且無直接證據證明該車因上訴人轉線而急剎及響號的情況下，且上訴人提供的有利證供未被有效推翻，控方未能在毫無合理疑點下證明上訴人轉線時不夠謹慎，故撤銷定罪及判刑。
Hong Kong Case Law
Inference from conduct
16 May 2023
香港特別行政區 訴 梁俊熹及另一人
- Citation
- [2023] HKCFI 850
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCMA166/2022
On re‑examination of the evidence including video, the judge found the only reasonable inference was that D6 cooperated with D5: D6 supplied the umbrella, remained in close proximity, observed and was available to assist, fled with D5 and thereafter loitered to observe the scene; these facts sustain conviction for obstructing a police officer and the appeal is dismissed.
31 Jan 2018
HKSAR v. WONG YAT MAN, SUNNY
- Citation
- [2018] HKCA 35
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Case number
- CACC16/2016
The Court held that, considering the timing, the sham nature and gross overvaluation of the jade transaction, the acquisition and deregistration of Bright Jade, the applicant's conduct and failure to explain the transactions, the only irresistible inference was that the applicant knowingly conspired to defraud Maryo and knowingly dealt with the proceeds; convictions on both charges are safe and the out‑of‑time renewed application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
30 Mar 2017
HKSAR v. DEWAN, ASLAM AND ANOTHER
- Citation
- HKSAR v. DEWAN, ASLAM AND ANOTHER
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCMA38/2017
The Magistrate accepted credible police evidence that each appellant performed work (unloading and arranging boxes) and, in the absence of evidence of a special relationship or any reasonable alternative explanation, the only reasonable and irresistible inference was that each had taken up employment contrary to the Immigration Ordinance; therefore the convictions were supported beyond reasonable doubt and should be upheld.
12 Oct 2016
HKSAR v. GURUNG LAXMAN
- Citation
- HKSAR v. GURUNG LAXMAN
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Case number
- CACC385/2015
Leave to appeal was granted because the trial judge's inferential finding that the applicant intended to traffic in all the drugs was not necessarily the only reasonable inference available on the primary facts; accordingly the conviction and sentence rest on a contested factual basis warranting appellate review.
19 Feb 2014
香港特別行政區 訴 文金輝
- Citation
- 香港特別行政區 訴 文金輝
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCMA576/2013
The High Court held the trial judge's inferences — that the appellant failed to observe the pedestrian and was driving without due care given the eyewitness account, the vehicle's higher seating, the appellant's admission of braking late, absence of earlier braking and the post-impact stopping position — were reasonably open on the evidence; accordingly the conviction for careless driving and the sentence were upheld.
1 Jun 2012
香港特別行政區 訴 何國華
- Citation
- 香港特別行政區 訴 何國華
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCMA46/2012
The judge permissibly inferred from contemporaneous documentary records (immigration, medical) and the appellant's subsequent conduct (bank application and issuance of company cheques) that the appellant knew his sworn statements about his father's absence and sole cheque-signing authority were false; those inferences were reasonable and not a misapplication of burden, so the conviction was safe and the appeal must be dismissed.
12 Aug 2003
HKSAR v. NG WAI LING
- Citation
- HKSAR v. NG WAI LING
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Case number
- CACC149/2002
Given the surrounding circumstances of a bogus trading operation and the applicant's words and conduct in inducing PW2 to invest, there was sufficient evidence for the judge to infer participation in the conspiracy; the judge did not err in drawing adverse inferences and the conviction was safe, therefore the appeal is dismissed.
13 Jun 1995
THE QUEEN v. CHAN KWOK-LEUNG
- Citation
- THE QUEEN v. CHAN KWOK-LEUNG
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCMA441/1995
The appellate court held that, although the appellant was in physical possession of the packets and gave inconsistent accounts, those facts did not permit the court to conclude beyond reasonable doubt that he knew the packets contained dangerous drugs; alternative reasonable inferences (such as having picked them up while cleaning) existed, so the conviction was unsafe and had to be quashed.
3 May 1990
FONG YIU TAO HA KUN FAT HONG v. LINPO INTERNATIONAL LTD
- Citation
- FONG YIU TAO HA KUN FAT HONG v. LINPO INTERNATIONAL LTD
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Case number
- CACV183/1989
The Court held that the amended letter of credit together with the parties' conduct justified inferring an agreement to extend delivery to 2 February, that there was a breach when delivery was not made, and that damages should be assessed by reference to the market price around 2 February (as supported by witness evidence and invoices); the appeal was dismissed.