Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

No-case-to-answer

Legal area

Court

17 Jun 2024

律政司司長訴李兆聰

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 1350
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA81/2023

The magistrate committed legal error by focusing on the legality of the later formal arrest and on whether the person actually committed unlawful assembly rather than whether the arresting officer, at the moment of stopping/subduing, had an objectively reasonable basis (under s54(2)/s50 principles) to suspect commission of an offence; the magistrate also improperly weighed collateral matters (another officer's use of force and policing tactics) and made impermissible factual determinations at the no‑case stage. Those errors justify allowing the appeal and remitting the case for rehearing befo…
19 Jan 2023

HKSAR v. AHMED RAZA

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 331
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA374/2022

Because the learned Magistrate had found the prosecution witnesses to be inherently improbable and unbelievable, there was no evidential basis to conclude the appellant had brought suspicion upon himself; the refusal of costs was therefore unjustified and the appeal was allowed with costs awarded for the trial and the appeal.
30 Mar 2021

香港特別行政區對陳偉明

Citation

[2021] HKCA 402
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC122/2019

The renewed application for leave was dismissed because the recognition parade and in‑court identifications were properly conducted and reliable, the trial judge's credibility findings were open on the evidence, and there was sufficient evidence that the applicant claimed to be a member of 14K to require him to answer the charge.
4 Mar 2013

HKSAR v. LEUNG SING CHUNG AND ANOTHER

Citation

HKSAR v. LEUNG SING CHUNG AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC143/2011

The convictions of both applicants were unsafe because the trial judge gave directions that blurred legal elements of trafficking (specifically 'dealing with') and wrongly framed inferences and admissions (notably treating an oral admission as 'very powerful' for both counts) and failed to properly direct the jury on the knowledge element and party liability; accordingly convictions were quashed and retrials ordered where the evidence justified them.
9 Oct 1986

ATTORNEY GENERAL v. CHIK WAI LUN

Citation

ATTORNEY GENERAL v. CHIK WAI LUN
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA536/1986

Membership of a triad society is a question of fact; a defendant's admission may, depending on circumstances and supporting evidence, constitute prima facie proof of membership; absent evidence of cessation, prior genuine membership may support a presumption of continued membership; on the facts before the magistrate there was a case to answer.
13 Oct 1972

CHENG TO-KIN v. THE QUEEN

Citation

CHENG TO-KIN v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC288/1972

Conviction on the count involving Fantana Limited (first count) was unsafe and must be quashed because reasonable doubt arose from unresolved ambiguity whether appellant acted on behalf of a separately owned Ka Fung company (WONG Chow) and the prosecution failed to call critical witnesses to dispel that doubt; by contrast, convictions based on positive eyewitness evidence of forgery and obtaining by deception were supported and must be upheld; sentences on the upheld counts are appropriate and not excessive.

Hong Kong Case Law

律政司司長 訴 李兆聰

HKSAR v. AHMED RAZA

香港特別行政區 對 陳偉明

HKSAR v. LEUNG SING CHUNG AND ANOTHER

ATTORNEY GENERAL v. CHIK WAI LUN

CHENG TO-KIN v. THE QUEEN

律政司司長訴李兆聰

香港特別行政區對陳偉明