Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Withdrawal of charge

Legal area

Court

10 Dec 2024

HKSAR v. CHEUNG KIE CHUNG

Citation

[2024] HKCA 1149
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC213/2020

Conviction quashed and retrial ordered because exclusion of the clinical psychologist's evidence on the issue of diminished responsibility was a material irregularity rendering the trial unfair; by contrast the trial judge was entitled to leave the murder charge to the jury and her directions on 'substantial' were adequate given the experts' equivocal evidence and relevant factual issues.
7 Mar 2023

HKSAR v. ELTHAF, CHAUDHRY MUHAMMAD

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 694
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA231/2022

The magistrate lawfully exercised her discretion to refuse costs; independent material (CCTV and WhatsApp messages) and the appellant's conduct prior to investigation constituted positive reasons to deprive him of costs for both the withdrawn rape charge and the acquittal on indecent assault, and the Court of First Instance upheld that exercise of discretion.
3 Mar 2021

HKSAR v. GURUNG SWATANTRA

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 478
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA240/2020

The magistrate erred in finding the prosecution was entitled to suspect or believe the appellant was a co-conspirator on the available evidence; the evidence was at best tenuous and the appellant's silence did not elevate it to justify refusal of costs. Therefore costs should follow the event and the appellant is entitled to his costs to be taxed if not agreed.
22 May 2008

HKSAR v. CANAVERAL, JOEMAR ROBLAS AND ANOTHER

Citation

HKSAR v. CANAVERAL, JOEMAR ROBLAS AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA271/2008

Because the prosecution delayed disclosure of material exculpatory evidence which prolonged the appellants' custody and incurred legal costs, and because costs follow the event, the court set aside the magistrate's $10,000 award and ordered that the appellants have their costs here and below, to be taxed if not agreed.
31 Jan 2008

HKSAR v. LAM CHIU FONG AND OTHERS

Citation

HKSAR v. LAM CHIU FONG AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA1148/2007

Where charges are withdrawn and no independent facts exist outside the charged conduct to justify suspicion, the presumption of innocence prevents denying costs on the basis of the same facts that founded the charge; therefore the appellants were entitled to costs.
16 Mar 2004

HKSAR v. HAU KAI HUNG

Citation

HKSAR v. HAU KAI HUNG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA922/2003

The magistrate erred in finding that the appellant had brought suspicion upon herself; her limited non‑cooperation and lending her name to rent premises did not amount to bringing suspicion sufficient to deny costs, therefore the appeal succeeds and costs must be awarded.
3 Aug 1984

ATTORNEY GENERAL v. WONG KWAI LOK

Citation

ATTORNEY GENERAL v. WONG KWAI LOK
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC408/1984

The court held that section 19(1) of the Magistrates Ordinance does not oust the inherent discretion of a court of summary jurisdiction to grant leave to an informant to withdraw a charge or information prior to a plea being taken; English authority and established practice support that withdrawal of process before the inquiry permits such a discretion.

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. CHEUNG KIE CHUNG

HKSAR v. ELTHAF, CHAUDHRY MUHAMMAD

HKSAR v. GURUNG SWATANTRA

HKSAR v. CANAVERAL, JOEMAR ROBLAS AND ANOTHER

HKSAR v. LAM CHIU FONG AND OTHERS

HKSAR v. HAU KAI HUNG

ATTORNEY GENERAL v. WONG KWAI LOK