26 Aug 2004
HKSAR v. LAM MEI LING AND ANOTHER
- Citation
- HKSAR v. LAM MEI LING AND ANOTHER
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCMA494/2004
Magistrate correctly rejected the 1st appellant's reliance on the common law defence because mere lending a name, absence of inquiry and implicit trust in spouse did not constitute a good and sufficient reason and the appellant derived benefit from the business; conviction of the 1st appellant is upheld. Regarding the 2nd appellant, the magistrate erred in distinguishing transactions solely by production of copies at trial; the 2nd appellant's consistent evidence that he inspected and believed the certificates genuine applied to all transactions and thus his convictions (as entered by the mag…