Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Two-person rule

Legal area

Court

6 Dec 2023

香港特別行政區訴陳朗笙

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 3044
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA404/2022

The court held the rented unit and its toilet were not a place the public could access because access was restricted to a particular class (the hirer and authorised crew) and the occupier retained exclusive control; accordingly the public element and the two-person rule required for the common law offence were not satisfied. The conviction was therefore unsafe and was quashed despite reliable admissions by the appellant.
13 May 2022

香港特別行政區訴陳恉信

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 1371
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA588/2021

The trial judge properly found the complainant credible and the videos admissible as voluntary; even though the recordings were admitted the judge did not rely on the appellant's in‑scene admissions for conviction; the male changing room was a public place and the two‑person rule was satisfied (the victim counts as one of the two and other users were capable of seeing the act); given the evidence the conviction is safe and the appeal is dismissed.
30 Aug 2013

HKSAR v. SO CHEUK WAI, ALLAN

Citation

HKSAR v. SO CHEUK WAI, ALLAN
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA21/2013

Appellate court found the magistrate erred in law and fact: convictions for outraging public decency (Charges 5 and 6) were unsustainable because the public/place and two-person elements were not proven; the magistrate inadequately assessed the impact of complainants' mutual discussions on reliability and failed to exclude accidental contact for indecent assault counts (Charges 4 and 7); on rehearing the prosecution had not proved the remaining indecent assault beyond reasonable doubt (Charge 1) and all impugned convictions were quashed and sentences set aside.

Hong Kong Case Law

香港特別行政區 訴 陳朗笙

香港特別行政區 訴 陳恉信

HKSAR v. SO CHEUK WAI, ALLAN

香港特別行政區訴陳朗笙

香港特別行政區訴陳恉信