Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Technical acquittal

Legal area

Court

22 Apr 2022

香港特別行政區訴陳文俊

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 1035
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA440/2021

The court found no conduct by the appellant that was sufficiently connected to the charged offence to constitute self‑exposure or to have misled the prosecution; the conviction was quashed on merits (not merely technical); accordingly the appellant was entitled to recover the costs of the original trial and the appeal, with any dispute as to amount to be assessed by the taxing officer.
10 Aug 2007

HKSAR v. LAMA, BABU RAM

Citation

HKSAR v. LAMA, BABU RAM
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA553/2007

Appeal allowed: where acquittal arises from flawed identification procedures and not established misconduct by the accused, the Magistrate erred in refusing costs; absent proven conduct justifying denial, the court must award costs to the acquitted defendant under s3(1)(c).
28 Jan 2000

HKSAR v. RONACRETE (FAR EAST) LTD.

Citation

HKSAR v. RONACRETE (FAR EAST) LTD.
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA1061/1999

Costs should have been awarded because the acquittal was based on genuine discrepancies in prosecution evidence and witness credibility rather than a technicality; the magistrate erred in treating the status of PW4 as a prosecution witness as a positive reason to deny costs.