Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

New trial discretion

  • 8 Mar 1985

    THE QUEEN v. LI YU-SANG

    Citation
    THE QUEEN v. LI YU-SANG
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCMA160/1985

    The conviction was quashed because the learned magistrate made no finding rejecting the appellant's alternative explanation that the money was received on behalf of a company, leaving the prosecution case unsafe; having weighed the interests of justice, including the weakness of the case being based largely on a single witness and the prejudice to the appellant, the court refused to order a new trial.

  • 17 Mar 1983

    THE QUEEN v. WONG TAK-LAM AND OTHERS

    Citation
    THE QUEEN v. WONG TAK-LAM AND OTHERS
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACC1120/1981

    The conviction of the 1st appellant (D1) was quashed because the trial judge materially misdirected on facts and law (including improper reliance on the guilty pleas of co-accused and other factual errors) such that the misdirections were significant and might have misled the judge into convicting; the proviso could not be applied because the court could not be satisfied the conviction would inevitably have been reached absent the errors. A new trial for D1 was ordered in the interests of justice (with Crown undertaking not to call evidence about D2 and D4). By contrast, the convictions of D3…

  • 23 Feb 1982

    LAM KAI WAI v. THE QUEEN

    Citation
    LAM KAI WAI v. THE QUEEN
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACC74/1982

    Certified translations of materially relevant exhibits (the cheques) were not before the trial magistrate and tended to support the appellant's explanation; the absence of that evidence rendered the conviction unsafe and required quashing, but the appellate court exercised its discretion not to order a retrial because of the appellant's age, the prosecution's omission, the low value of articles, the time already served and the balance of interests of justice.

  • 2 Jun 1971

    LAM WOON-NANG v. THE QUEEN

    Citation
    LAM WOON-NANG v. THE QUEEN
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACC138/1971

    The conviction was quashed because the jury were misdirected by repeated statements that the accused's evidence should be judged on the balance of probabilities; no new trial was ordered because the evidence was sufficiently weak that a retrial would be unjust and a conviction on retrial would be a matter of chance; caution given that references to balance of probabilities are dangerous except where law places an onus on the accused.