Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

S83v criminal procedure ordinance

Legal area

Court

25 Oct 2019

CHINA SHANSHUI CEMENT GROUP LTD AND OTHERS v. ZHANG CAIKUI AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2019] HKCA 1207
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV271/2018

The court admitted only the portion of the new evidence proving the four missing documents were at Jinan HQ (paras 16–17 and exhibit ZCK-1) because it satisfied the s83V(2) conditions (credible, admissible, relevant, reasonable explanation for late production and would afford a ground of appeal); the court refused leave for evidence on control of Shandong Cement (paras 23–34) because the defendants failed to give a reasonable explanation for not adducing that evidence below.
22 Nov 1988

THE QUEEN v. TAM KWOK-YEUNG AND OTHERS

Citation

THE QUEEN v. TAM KWOK-YEUNG AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA926/1988

Convictions were unsafe and were set aside because the principal evidence establishing management and the identity of the second woman was inadmissible hearsay (inspector's testimony mediated by an uncalled interpreter) and there was no reasonable explanation to admit fresh evidence on appeal under s83V; consequently the prosecution failed to prove the premises were a vice establishment and failed to prove the appellants' roles.