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

Chim Pui Chung v Hksar

Judgment Cited in Precedent Map Related
Vincent
Judgment Date01 February 1999
Citation[1999] 1 HKLRD 836; (1999) 2 HKCFAR 166
Judgement NumberFAMC1/1999
Subject MatterMiscellaneous Proceedings (Criminal)
CourtCourt of Final Appeal (Hong Kong)
FAMC000001/1999 CHIM PUI CHUNG v. HKSAR

FAMC No. 1 of 1999

IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 1 OF 1999 (CRIMINAL)

(ON APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL

FROM CACC No. 402 OF 1998)

_____________________

Between:

CHIM PUI CHUNG Applicant
AND
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION Respondent

_____________________

Appeal Committee: Chief Justice Li, Mr Justice Litton PJ and Mr Justice Ching PJ

Date of Hearing: 1 February 1999

Date of Determination: 1 February 1999

___________________________

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

___________________________

Mr Justice Ching PJ :

1. The applicant was brought to trial before a jury on six counts. In one of them, count three, he was charged alone. The remainder consisted of conspiracy charges in which it was alleged that he had conspired with Chan Kai-fung, the second Defendant, and with other persons unknown. Chan Kai-fung was acquitted of all the charges brought against him. The applicant was acquitted upon the first five but was convicted on the sixth. He applied for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal but this was refused. He then applied to the Court of Appeal to certify that there were two points of law of great and general importance involved but this the Court of Appeal also refused. He now applies to this Committee to certify only one of them and for leave to appeal upon it. He also asks for leave to appeal on the ground that a grave and substantial injustice has been done.

2. The sixth count reads, in part,

"Conspiracy to Forge, contrary to Common Law and section 71 of the Crimes Ordinance, Cap. 200.

Particulars of Offence

Chim Pui-chung and Chan Kai-fung, on divers days on and between the 1st day of July 1994 and the 25th day of August 1994, in Hong Kong, conspired together and with other persons unknown, to make false instruments, namely 'Instruments of Transfer' documents, purporting to evidence the Sale of Shares in Lucky Man Properties Limited, by the named transferors to Power Master Development Limited, with the intention that they or another should use them to induce another, namely officers of the Inland Revenue Department and Progressive Registration Limited, to accept them to do or not to do some act to the prejudice of himself or another ..."

The acts were then particularised. The relevance of the Inland Revenue Department was that the documents attracted stamp duty. Progressive Registration Limited was the company registrar of Lucky Man Properties Limited who would not have accepted the documents unless they had been properly stamped.

3. The remaining question of law which is said to be of great and general importance is,

"1. Where the prosecution alleges in an indictment that an accused conspired 'with persons unknown' then

(a) is there a duty on the prosecution (arising from either the accused's right to a fair trial under Article 10 of the Hong Kong Bill of Rights, (sic) Cap. 383 (HKBR) or Article 14.1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and/or from the various rights of an accused under Article 11(2) HKBR or Article 14.3 ICCPR and/or otherwise to identify the evidence upon which such allegation is made or otherwise to explain or put the basis of its case thereon with proper...

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