Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Insufficient evidence

Legal area

Court

3 Nov 2022

HKSAR v. DINH KA YAN, GIGI

Citation

[2022] HKCA 1641
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC122/2021

Leave to appeal conviction was refused because the judge's directions were legally correct — part possession for trafficking suffices and the jury were properly directed on inferential reasoning — but leave to appeal the sentence was granted because there was a reasonably arguable issue that the jury may have convicted on a basis (sharing a small amount) that could affect the appropriate sentence, warranting full appellate consideration.
26 Jun 2002

HKSAR v. MA KA KIT

Citation

HKSAR v. MA KA KIT
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA52/2002

Appeal allowed because the magistrate's inference that the appellant invited the victim to join Wo Shing Wo was not the only reasonable inference on the evidence and the conviction could not stand.
2 Mar 1995

THE QUEEN v. LAU CHIN CHI

Citation

THE QUEEN v. LAU CHIN CHI
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA86/1995

Conviction quashed because there was insufficient evidence to prove the taxi's speed and uncertainty about the operation of the relevant traffic lights meant the conviction could not be regarded as safe and satisfactory.
18 Jan 1984

THE QUEEN v. CHIU KAI-YIP

Citation

THE QUEEN v. CHIU KAI-YIP
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCC1459/1983

The evidence created a lurking doubt as to guilt on each charge; convictions were therefore unsafe and were quashed.
8 Feb 1983

LAU WAI YING v. CHEG BO CHU t/a MING CHU BOUTIQUE WITH ITS ACCESSORY PROPERTY INVESTMENT SECTION

Citation

LAU WAI YING v. CHEG BO CHU t/a MING CHU BOUTIQUE WITH ITS ACCESSORY PROPERTY INVESTMENT SECTION
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCSA13/1982

The appeal was allowed because the adjudicator's decisive factual finding—that the defendant substituted her sister as purchaser and conspired to deprive the claimant of commission—was totally unsupported by any evidence, rendering the Small Claims judgment unsustainable.
16 Sept 1977

CHAN YIU CHONG v. THE QUEEN

Citation

CHAN YIU CHONG v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC876/1977

Conviction was quashed because there was an unresolved and material conflict of evidence about where the appellant stopped relative to the traffic sign (north vs south side of the road), generating reasonable doubt as to whether the alleged contravention occurred; the magistrate's acceptance of the prosecution case despite that conflict rendered the conviction unsafe.
22 Jul 1977

SO TONG v. THE QUEEN

Citation

SO TONG v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC688/1977

The conviction was unsafe and must be quashed because the charge lacked necessary particulars and a crucial item alleged to produce the incriminating fumes (the paper strip) was not examined by the Government Chemist; only a matchbox was sent and the chemist's certificate referred only to that exhibit, leaving the prosecution without proof of the charged act.

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. DINH KA YAN, GIGI

HKSAR v. MA KA KIT

THE QUEEN v. LAU CHIN CHI

THE QUEEN v. CHIU KAI-YIP

LAU WAI YING v. CHEG BO CHU t/a MING CHU BOUTIQUE WITH ITS ACCESSORY PROPERTY INVESTMENT SECTION

CHAN YIU CHONG v. THE QUEEN

SO TONG v. THE QUEEN