Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Recovery of proceeds

Legal area

Court

16 Nov 2017

HKSAR v. AGUILLON RUIZ JAIME AND ANOTHER

Citation

HKSAR v. AGUILLON RUIZ JAIME AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCC365/2016

The court found the prosecution had established a prima facie connection between the seized cash and the trafficking offence and rejected the defendants' explanations as not credible based on the large quantity of drugs and packaging paraphernalia, the cash composition and amounts, defendants' admitted financial pressures and inconsistencies in evidence; accordingly the cash in exhibits P28-P38, P45 and P54-P56 was forfeitable under s56(1).
28 Oct 2005

HKSAR v. GUAN LIQING AND OTHERS

Citation

HKSAR v. GUAN LIQING AND OTHERS
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC148/2005

The appellate court held that the partially consecutive 9-month term imposed on the conspiracy count (charge 3) was inappropriate because the conspiracy encompassed the date of the substantive offence in charge 2, so the sentences on charges 2 and 3 should run concurrently; accordingly D4's total sentence is reduced to five years. Appeals by D1 and D2 were dismissed as without merit.
11 May 2005

DARACH E. HAUGHEY AND ANOTHER v. LAM WAI PING STELLA AND OTHERS

Citation

DARACH E. HAUGHEY AND ANOTHER v. LAM WAI PING STELLA AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCB276/2002

The court found on the balance of probabilities that the bankrupt deliberately transferred funds to the 1st respondent and caused acquisition through Irving with the intention of placing assets beyond his creditors; those transfers (HK$3,583,600 and HK$7,470,600 applied to Park Place, and US$2,000,000 to Grainger) were gifts/transactions at an undervalue under s 49 and are void against the Trustees, entitling Trustees to repayment and to the net sale proceeds of Park Place.
13 Jan 1998

HKSAR v. YIU TAT CHOY

Citation

HKSAR v. YIU TAT CHOY
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC613/1997

Given the magnitude of the conspiracy and the net proceeds (HK$74 million) the 9‑year starting point was not manifestly excessive; the trial judge correctly weighed roles and mitigation, properly discounted credit for the applicant's absconding and lack of meaningful assistance; there was no error of principle and the application to appeal the sentence was dismissed.
12 Jan 1994

NG YAT HING v. R.

Citation

NG YAT HING v. R.
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC382/1993

The original aggregate sentence was manifestly inadequate given the prolonged, large‑scale and deliberate breach of trust involving forged company cheques and only partial recovery of funds; the Court allowed the appeal, quashed the lower sentence and increased each count by one year to achieve an appropriate totality of three years and four months' imprisonment.

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. AGUILLON RUIZ JAIME AND ANOTHER

HKSAR v. GUAN LIQING AND OTHERS

DARACH E. HAUGHEY AND ANOTHER v. LAM WAI PING STELLA AND OTHERS

HKSAR v. YIU TAT CHOY

NG YAT HING v. R.