Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Statutory presumption of knowledge

Legal area

Court

14 Oct 2000

HKSAR v. OBIEGBU PRINCE JERRY JAY

Citation

HKSAR v. OBIEGBU PRINCE JERRY JAY
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA567/2000

Conviction was unsafe because the magistrate failed to give rational, reasoned consideration to material defence submissions and evidence (including statutory presumption issues and negative investigative results) and therefore the finding of trafficking could not be sustained; appeal allowed, conviction and sentence quashed, retrial ordered in interest of justice.
29 Apr 1998

HKSAR v. WONG MAN TAT

Citation

HKSAR v. WONG MAN TAT
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC635/1997

The Court refused leave because the trial judge's summing up fairly and properly directed the jury on possession, burden of proof, statutory presumption and the proper drawing of an inference of trafficking from quantity and value; the jury had ample credible evidence (police testimony and expert valuation) to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the applicant possessed the drugs for trafficking and the defence allegations of planting were unsubstantiated.
12 May 1987

THE QUEEN v. CHAU WING AND ANOTHER

Citation

THE QUEEN v. CHAU WING AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC14/1987

The trial judge's directions were adequate; Section 45 created a rebuttable presumption placing the onus on the defendant to prove lack of knowledge, the jury properly rejected the defendant's explanation, and the sentence was within proper discretionary bounds given the scale of the offence and the limited value of the claimed cooperation.
15 May 1986

THE QUEEN v. NG KWOK YING

Citation

THE QUEEN v. NG KWOK YING
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC109/1986

The Court held the statutory presumption of knowledge was not rebutted on the facts: the appellant had at least one key and accessed the deposit box on relevant dates, and the evidence supported a finding of knowledge; the husband's acquittal did not undermine the conviction; however, exceptional mitigating factors justified reducing the sentence to 18 months imprisonment on each charge to run concurrently.

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. OBIEGBU PRINCE JERRY JAY

HKSAR v. WONG MAN TAT

THE QUEEN v. CHAU WING AND ANOTHER

THE QUEEN v. NG KWOK YING