30 Aug 2024
香港特別行政區 訴 劍虹地基有限公司
- Citation
- [2024] HKCFI 2719
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCMA398/2022
The original information described known offences and the defect was procedural duplicity rather than nullity; the magistrate validly exercised s27 powers to split and amend the counts because the amended charges derived from the same factual matter and were not time‑barred; the trial judge correctly accepted prosecution evidence (including photographic and expert evidence) and properly rejected the defence expert as result‑focused; the evidence proved beyond reasonable doubt both offences under Cap.123 and the convictions must stand.