Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Statutory presumption of possession

Legal area

Court

11 Jun 2001

HKSAR v. CHAN MING FAI

Citation

HKSAR v. CHAN MING FAI
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC308/2000

Although the deputy judge's directions on the s.47 presumption were unclear and amounted to a material irregularity, by majority the court applied the proviso in s.83(1) Cap.221 because there was overwhelming evidence that a properly directed jury would inevitably have found the applicant guilty on both possession and knowledge; accordingly leave was granted but the appeal dismissed and the conviction upheld.
12 Jul 1988

THE QUEEN v. LEUNG CHI KEUNG

Citation

THE QUEEN v. LEUNG CHI KEUNG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC12/1988

Although the judge did not explicitly identify s.47(3) and used an imprecise formulation of the standard of proof, the jury were correctly directed on the central issue of knowledge, the presumptions would have produced the same result if articulated, and no miscarriage of justice occurred; accordingly leave to appeal was refused.
5 Mar 1981

LEE CHING HUNG v. THE QUEEN

Citation

LEE CHING HUNG v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC1069/1980

A sentence for possession of acetic anhydride must be predicated on evidence as to the offender's knowledge of the substance's use; where the offender persistently denies awareness of its illegal purpose the Crown must be allowed to lead evidence and the offender to rebut before a sentence is fixed, and absent such evidence any doubt should be resolved in the offender's favour for sentencing purposes.
27 May 1977

CHAN SING WAH v. THE QUEEN

Citation

CHAN SING WAH v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC481/1977

Convictions were unsafe and unsatisfactory because there was no clear evidence of possession or trafficking absent an expressly recorded reliance on the statutory presumption, key exhibits (police notebook and sealed envelope) were not produced and had been destroyed, critical facts about where and when the search/arrest occurred were unclear and unclarified by the magistrate, and the prosecution failed to call supporting evidence; appeal allowed and convictions quashed.
4 Dec 1968

WU HIM FONG v. THE QUEEN

Citation

WU HIM FONG v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC459/1968

When the appellant, as driver, had physical control of the vehicle and locked the boot containing five sacks of raw opium, the statutory presumption under the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance arose that he possessed and knew the nature of the drugs; possession in the Ordinance includes custody or control and possession on behalf of another; the presumption shifted a lighter evidential onus to the appellant to rebut on the balance of probabilities, the trial judge's directions were not misleading, and the conviction was therefore safe.

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. CHAN MING FAI

THE QUEEN v. LEUNG CHI KEUNG

LEE CHING HUNG v. THE QUEEN

CHAN SING WAH v. THE QUEEN

WU HIM FONG v. THE QUEEN