Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Knowledge

Legal area

Court

5 Jun 2025

HKSAR v. MAN TSZ CHING

Citation

[2025] HKCA 506
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC176/2022

Leave to appeal against conviction refused because the Judge's summing-up, when read as a whole, fairly presented the defence including the alleged set-up by the wanted person and did not amount to misdirection or descent into the arena; however leave to appeal against sentence was granted because subsequent authorities (Huang Ruifang (No. 3)) changed the appropriate starting point for offences of this quantity of narcotics, potentially reducing the sentence.
20 Jan 2022

HKSAR v. TSE SUI HING

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 281
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA474/2021

The Court held the Magistrate acted properly in intervening and was best placed to assess credibility; the Magistrate's rejection of the appellant's exculpatory account was reasonable on the admitted facts; absence of defendant DNA did not negate possession or trafficking and the male DNA report undermined the girlfriend defence; on authorities and the totality of evidence the findings of dealing/trafficking were open and the conviction was safe, so the appeal was dismissed.
7 Oct 2021

香港特別行政區訴林子寒

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 2995
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA285/2021

Although objective facts showed a close link between the appellant and the parcel (name/address match and multiple telephone calls from the airwaybill number), the prosecution did not prove that the appellant participated in importing the drugs; the evidence did not permit the unique and irresistible inference that he was involved in the importation, and the acts proved did not go beyond mere preparation so as to sustain a conviction or permit substitution to attempt. Therefore the conviction was unsafe and must be quashed.
27 May 2020

HKSAR v. MUHAMMAD, FURQAN

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 740
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA525/2019

The magistrate's accepted factual findings that the appellant reached into and opened hidden plastic bags after interacting with others, combined with the packaging, concealment and high street value of the drugs and contextual factors (multiple phones and cash), supported the irresistible inference that the appellant had control, possession and knowledge of the drugs and thus dealt with them; the appellate court found no basis to overturn the magistrate's credibility or fact findings and dismissed the appeal.
16 May 2019

HKSAR v. JOSEPH NABEEL

Citation

[2019] HKCA 527
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC181/2018

Leave to appeal was granted because it was reasonably arguable that the trial judge erred in leaving to the jury the inference that the applicant was the occupier as the only reasonable inference and thereby failed to direct the jury that alternative inferences advanced by the defence (including that he was acting to assist an occupant) were open; that failure deprived the defence of important contextual weight and may have affected the verdict.
1 Feb 2019

HKSAR v. CHAN TAK WAI

Citation

[2019] HKCA 153
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC292/2017

The judge fairly and comprehensively directed the jury on the critical issues (possession, knowledge and credibility); the combination of CCTV evidence, the applicant's fingerprint on the outer covering and the surrounding circumstances supported an inference of continuous possession and knowledge beyond reasonable doubt, and the unexplained HK$700 was properly left for the jury to weigh; accordingly there was no miscarriage of justice and the conviction stands.
20 Jul 2016

HKSAR v. SHAH SYED ARIF

Citation

HKSAR v. SHAH SYED ARIF
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC298/2015

The summing-up was fair and no arguable grounds for disturbing the jury's unanimous conviction existed; the applicant's status as a torture claimant who abused the privilege of liberty by trafficking in a substantial quantity of cocaine was an aggravating factor justifying enhancement of sentence, but the specific enhancement imposed by the trial judge (1 year 10 months) was excessive and should be reduced to 1 year, producing an overall sentence of 9 years 2 months imprisonment.
26 May 2016

HKSAR v. ZHOU LIMEI

Citation

HKSAR v. ZHOU LIMEI
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FAMC35/2015

The court accepted that the application raised a reasonably arguable contention that the applicant may have been wrongly treated as having made an admission of knowledge of the drugs, such that a substantial and grave injustice could have arisen; accordingly a hearing on the leave application was directed to be fixed.
19 May 2016

HKSAR v. LEUNG CHI KEUNG

Citation

HKSAR v. LEUNG CHI KEUNG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC373/2015

The judge reasonably drew the only permissible inference that the applicant knew of and was in possession of the child pornography because the files were in his Foxy download folder, were readily accessible and had been accessed repeatedly between 2008 and 2013, the computer was found in his bedroom, and alternative explanations (virus, third-party access, malfunction) were rejected on the evidence; accordingly there are no reasonably arguable grounds of appeal and leave is refused.
22 Mar 2016

HKSAR v. FUNG CHI, MARCO

Citation

HKSAR v. FUNG CHI, MARCO
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC11/2015

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant's grounds lacked merit: the judge's directions on law and on evaluating the defendant's evidence were adequate, the absence of fingerprints was neutral and not decisive, and the failure to elicit a good character direction resulted from a considered tactical decision by defence counsel which binds the client and did not produce a miscarriage of justice.