Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Unmanifested cargo

Legal area

Court

1 Sept 2020

HKSAR v. LIU YAU FOOK

Citation

[2020] HKCA 745
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC186/2019

The Court held that the objective circumstances (night loading of black-wrapped pallets onto speedboats very close to the border, observed operation of the crane by the applicant, the lack of manifest) were acts more than merely preparatory and permitted only the irresistible inference that the applicant intended to export the goods; the judge was entitled to reject the applicant’s cautioned statement and to refuse leave to appeal.
21 May 2008

HKSAR v. LEE LAW AND OTHERS

Citation

HKSAR v. LEE LAW AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA884/2007

The trial Magistrate accepted the prosecution eyewitness testimony that the unlit vessel was heading northeast, attempted to escape, and when boarded contained a large quantity of unmanifested cargo; those findings supported the legitimate inference that the Appellants were attempting to export unmanifested goods and the appellate court found no material error or irregularity in those factual findings and dismissed the appeal.
12 Mar 2008

HKSAR v. SO SUNG LOI AND OTHERS

Citation

HKSAR v. SO SUNG LOI AND OTHERS
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC115/2007

The court concluded from the proven facts (value, quantity, night operation, lack of manifest, destination orders and local knowledge) that each appellant who dealt with the cargo knowingly intended to assist export without a manifest; the conspiracies to make false claims tended to pervert the course of justice and warranted imprisonment; accordingly appeals against sentence were dismissed for D1, D2, D5, D9 and D10, but allowed for D4 and D7 on the basis that time served was sufficient and orders were made for their immediate release; the out‑of‑time conviction appeal by D1 was dismissed.
17 Sept 2007

TSANG WAI NAM v. HKSAR

Citation

TSANG WAI NAM v. HKSAR
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FAMC15/2007

The Court held that the applicant's acts in arranging for delivery and shipment of the containers were properly found by the courts below to constitute an attempt to export unmanifested cargo under s 18(1)(b) pursuant to the causation/control test in AG v Tse Hung-lit and O'Sullivan; leave to appeal is therefore dismissed as no question of general importance or substantial injustice arises.
24 Oct 2000

HKSAR v. SHEK TAK TAI

Citation

HKSAR v. SHEK TAK TAI
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA795/2000

The appeal was dismissed because the magistrate did not err in principle nor impose a sentence that was manifestly excessive given the agreed facts, the value of the goods, the clandestine nature of the transshipment and supporting authorities allowing immediate custodial sentences in similar smuggling cases.
14 Dec 1999

HKSAR v. LUM SHUI KWAI

Citation

HKSAR v. LUM SHUI KWAI
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA970/1999

The first-charge sentence of 12 months was not manifestly excessive given the scale and public health risk; the third charge arose from the same incident and therefore its sentence should run concurrently with the first two, making total custody 12 months.
27 Oct 1999

HKSAR v. ZHENG WAN TAI

Citation

HKSAR v. ZHENG WAN TAI
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC254/1999

The Court held the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in refusing severance; the evidence supported an irresistible inference that all 136 motorcycles were stolen and that the applicant knew or believed they were stolen; the doctrine of recent possession properly applies to second‑limb handling (assisting) per R v Ball and Winning; Exhibit P18 was a true copy of the manifest; accordingly leave to appeal was refused and convictions and concurrent two‑year sentences were upheld.
10 Jul 1997

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION v. WONG TIN CHUK

Citation

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION v. WONG TIN CHUK
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA285/1997

The magistrate was entitled to accept the voice identification given frequent and specific telephone contacts corroborated by documentary and witness evidence; he had given adequate warning about voice identification, and on the whole evidence the convictions were safe and should be upheld.
4 Jul 1995

R. v. NG CHI WAI

Citation

R. v. NG CHI WAI
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA352/1995

The Court held the appellant's conduct of delivering the container to the cargo handling area and leaving it were acts of preparation, not an attempt to export; accordingly the conviction for attempting to export was unsustainable and was quashed.
15 Feb 1994

THE QUEEN v. CHAN KIM FAI

Citation

THE QUEEN v. CHAN KIM FAI
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA982/1993

Magistrate erred in law by holding that it was irrelevant whether reasonable diligence would have disclosed the true nature of the cargo; where the exercise of reasonable diligence could not have revealed that the cargo was unmanifested, the statutory defence under s.18(2) is established, and the conviction cannot stand.