Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Magistrate's duties

Legal area

Court

25 Apr 2008

RMBSA CORPORATE SERVICES LTD AND ANOTHER v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE AND ANOTHER

Citation

RMBSA CORPORATE SERVICES LTD AND ANOTHER v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV327/2006

The Court refused the certificate under s32(2) because the questions of law posed were not properly raised on these facts: the records sought did not prima facie appear to be covered by legal professional privilege, so it was unnecessary to decide whether a magistrate must attach protective conditions or whether failure to do so invalidates a warrant.
7 Aug 1992

CHO MING LOK v. THE GOVERNMENT OF UNITED STATES

Citation

CHO MING LOK v. THE GOVERNMENT OF UNITED STATES
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2980/1991

Magistrate erred by not analyzing charges and defendants separately and by treating multiple intertwined negotiations as a single conspiracy; the U.S. arrest warrants were properly authenticated; a concluded agreement is required for conspiracy and on the evidence there was no prima facie case of the charged conspiracy (Crime 3) against Cho, so Crime 3 must be quashed as to the applicants; joint committal procedure was irregular but not fatal to committal on the properly supported charges against Fung Chuen-kan.
18 Nov 1986

THE QUEEN v. LEUNG SIU TONG

Citation

THE QUEEN v. LEUNG SIU TONG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA942/1986

The complainant's statement to the officer in the presence of the accused was properly admissible as res gestae; there is no rule requiring a magistrate to produce prior statements used for refreshing memory; vigorous cross-examination by a co-defendant's counsel did not render the trial unfair; the magistrate's acceptance of prosecution witnesses and rejection of the appellant's account was open to him on the evidence and supports affirming the convictions.
28 May 1974

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL v. LEUNG CHI KIN

Citation

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL v. LEUNG CHI KIN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC119/1974

The Case as drafted and signed by the magistrate was manifestly deficient (missing material findings, parties' contentions and properly framed questions); under s.109 the appellate court must remit the Case to the magistrate for restatement; parties should attempt to agree a draft and may use s.112 to compel amendment; appeal adjourned and appellant ordered to pay respondent's costs of the adjournment (including fee of not more than one counsel).

Hong Kong Case Law

RMBSA CORPORATE SERVICES LTD AND ANOTHER v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE AND ANOTHER

CHO MING LOK v. THE GOVERNMENT OF UNITED STATES

THE QUEEN v. LEUNG SIU TONG

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL v. LEUNG CHI KIN