Your World of Legal Intelligence
 Hong Kong | 1-800-335-6202

Chan Pui Chi v Hksar

Judgment Cited in Precedent Map Related
Vincent
Judgment Date25 February 1999
Year1999
Judgement NumberFAMC32/1998
Subject MatterMiscellaneous Proceedings (Criminal)
CourtCourt of Final Appeal (Hong Kong)
FAMC000032/1998 CHAN PUI CHI v. HKSAR

FAMC000032/1998

FAMC No. 32 of 1998

IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 32 OF 1998 (CRIMINAL)

(ON APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL

FROM CACC NO. 706 OF 1997)

_____________________

Between:
CHAN PUI CHI Applicant
AND
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION Respondent

_____________________

Appeal Committee: Mr Justice Litton PJ, Mr Justice Ching PJ and Mr Justice Bokhary PJ

Date of Hearing: 25 February 1999

Date of Determination: 25 February 1999

________________________________

D E T E R M I N A T I O N

________________________________

Mr Justice Ching PJ:

1. A jury found the applicant guilty of two counts of trafficking in a dangerous drug. His application for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal was refused on the grounds that it was without any merit. Indeed, that application was found to be so devoid of merit that two months' loss of time was ordered. He now seeks leave from this Committee to appeal to the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal.

2. He has raised before us numerous matters which appear to have been put forward to the Court of Appeal. We are so far in agreement with the judgment of that Court that we do not intend to rehearse them. Before us he put forward additional matters including an allegation of conspiracy by the police, the fact that he was suffering from a critical illness when he appeared in person in the Court of Appeal and the fact that he was unprepared at that time to put forward his appeal because he had been abandoned by the Department of Legal Aid so shortly before the appeal that he had been unable to read the papers which in any event were in the English language. The allegation of conspiracy should have been, if it was not, put forward at trial. The other two matters should have been put forward to the Court of Appeal. In any event the evidence at trial was strong and the summing-up of the trial judge was complete and unobjectionable.

3. This application is dismissed.

( Henry Litton ) ( Charles Ching ) ( Kemal Bokhary )
Permanent Judge Permanent Judge Permanent Judge

Representation:

Mr. CHAN Pui Chi, Applicant, in person.

Mr. John Reading, SADPP (Department of Justice) for Respondent.

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT