1 Oct 1982
The convictions were quashed because the prosecution failed to prove the essential element of evasion by deception — there was no evidence that the post-dated cheques induced the complainant to delay action to recover the debt, particularly in relation to the two $25,000 cheques which the complainant did not expect to be presented.
15 Jun 1982
Under Hong Kong law the drawing and handing over of post-dated cheques can amount to deception as to a future state of affairs; the statutory presumption in section 29(6) applies to offences under sections 17/18 and to officers prosecuted under section 20; similar fact evidence may be used to prove guilty knowledge or intent; applying these principles the court found that MAN Chi-lun, as the company boss and signatory, connived in obtaining goods by deception and convicted him on multiple charges, whereas LO Siu-Kuen lacked signing authority and requisite knowledge and was acquitted on the ch…