Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Search and seizure

Legal area

Court

3 Feb 2026

O KIN TUEN v. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS AND EXCISE

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 606
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL2182/2025

The application for judicial review is dismissed because the Seized Money was lawfully seized under a warrant issued pursuant to OSCO s5, the Commissioner lawfully retained it pending a complex and ongoing investigation (and potential prosecution), and the applicant failed to establish that he holds the proprietary rights necessary to engage constitutional protection; on the alternative assumption that property rights were engaged, retention was proportionate given the nature and complexity of the investigation and the Seized Money's evidentiary value.
20 Aug 2025

香港特別行政區訴鍾承泰

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 3768
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA273/2024

The court, on a rehearing, accepted the trial judge's credibility findings that PW1 was honest and the appellant's accounts were inconsistent and implausible; given the physical evidence (the ATM card affixed to a bank letter) and the circumstances, the only irresistible inferences were that the appellant knew the card did not belong to him and dishonestly appropriated it, and the interview/meeting record was voluntary — therefore the evidence proved theft beyond reasonable doubt and the two‑month sentence was not manifestly excessive.
31 May 2024

HKSAR v. OBI COSMAS NONSO (aka DOLO SAYDOU) AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 1448
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCC93/2022

On the evidence the court accepted the police witnesses as credible, rejected the defendants' accounts as inherently improbable, and held beyond reasonable doubt that both defendants were aware of and jointly trafficked in the total quantities of drugs seized from the Room; that finding forms the basis for sentencing.
9 May 2024

香港特別行政區訴梁滿祥

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 1671
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA107/2022

On rehearing the High Court found the cumulative circumstantial, documentary and electronic evidence established beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant made false representations in the online application (including use of his email/phone and company documents), that key supporting documents were fabricated or not genuine, and that the appellant acted dishonestly; accordingly the conviction for attempted fraud was safe and the 9‑month immediate custodial sentence was appropriate and upheld.
14 Nov 2023

香港特別行政區訴潘家駿

Citation

[2023] HKDC 1620
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCC1048/2022

The court excluded the alleged oral confession as unreliable because police accounts were inconsistent and failed to contemporaneously record key matters (the defendant's spontaneous reference to the scene, the giving of cautions and the defendant's refusal to sign), leaving the confession unsupported; with the confession excluded, CCTV and glove evidence were insufficient to prove identity beyond reasonable doubt, so the prosecution failed to discharge its burden and the defendant could not be convicted.
19 Jun 2023

LAI CHEE-YING v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

Citation

[2023] HKCA 777
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV356/2022

The application for a certificate was dismissed because both questions advanced were novel points not previously raised below or in the appeal (and one reversed the applicant's pleaded position), the appeals had become academic as the disputed journalistic material had been accessed, and the application was out of time; therefore leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal was refused and certification denied.
19 Jun 2023

LAI CHEE-YING v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

Citation

[2023] HKCA 777
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV357/2022

The application for a certificate was dismissed because the Questions sought to be certified raised new points of law that had not been previously argued and thus were unsuitable for certification, and because the appeals had become academic as the substantive disputes had ceased; consequently it was unnecessary and futile to extend time for a late application.
17 Mar 2023

HKSAR v. KONG MING LING

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 739
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCC69/2020

Having accepted the prosecution witnesses as credible on all material matters, the court found the verbal admissions and the post-record were voluntary and copies of the notice and post-record were served; the stop, arrest and premises search were lawful under relevant statutory powers; no breach or unfairness was so grave as to justify exercising the discretion to exclude evidence; accordingly both the admissions/post-record and the drug seizures were admissible.
19 Oct 2022

LAI CHEE-YING v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

Citation

[2022] HKCA 1574
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV357/2022

The Court held that 'specified evidence' in section 1 of Schedule 1 of the Implementation Rules, read in the statutory context of the NSL and local search laws, includes journalistic material; magistrates issuing warrants under Schedule 1 must exercise their discretion with public‑interest balancing and the Schedule operates in tandem with local protections (including common law and Part XII IGCO safeguards), so the plaintiff's construction excluding journalistic material was untenable and leave for judicial review was properly refused.
19 Oct 2022

LAI CHEE-YING v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

Citation

[2022] HKCA 1574
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV356/2022

"Specified evidence" in s 1 of Schedule 1 of the Implementation Rules includes journalistic material. That inclusion is consistent with the NSL's objective to enable effective investigation; magistrates exercising discretion under Schedule 1 must perform the public‑interest balancing and judicial gatekeeping (informed by local law, Part XII IGCO and common law) to protect freedom of the press. Consequently the judge correctly refused leave for judicial review and allowed the summons; the appeals are dismissed.