Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Mistaken belief defence

Legal area

Court

14 Dec 2023

HKSAR v. HUI KA LOK, SAM

Citation

[2023] HKCA 1358
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC269/2021

Leave to appeal against conviction refused for Grounds 1–6 because the trial directions were adequate and the complained matters were not reasonably arguable; leave granted for Ground 7 because omission to direct on the co-conspirator rule in relation to certain texts and statements was reasonably arguable. Leave to appeal against sentence granted on all grounds because issues about the appropriate starting point for very large quantities and the quantum and aggregation of enhancements (role and international element) raised arguable questions including application of the totality principle.
4 May 2009

HKSAR v. LUI WING CHEUNG

Citation

HKSAR v. LUI WING CHEUNG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA623/2008

Magistrate's credibility findings that no superior granted authority were upheld on rehearing; appellant's assertions of permission and mistaken belief were unsupported by evidence and contradicted by hospital and supervisory testimony, and atropine was not supplied at the prison so s.23 liability stands; sentencing adjusted where appropriate – custodial sentence for possession in locker (quantity and bags indicative of supply) was justified, but lesser penalties fit for the minor on-person tablets and for possession of atropine as a Part 1 poison.
10 Nov 2003

LIU SIK KEUNG v. HKSAR

Citation

LIU SIK KEUNG v. HKSAR
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FAMC41/2003

Leave refused because the magistrate's factual findings demonstrated non‑consent and precluded a genuine mistaken‑belief defence; no exceptional circumstances justified ordering costs against the applicant

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. HUI KA LOK, SAM

HKSAR v. LUI WING CHEUNG

LIU SIK KEUNG v. HKSAR