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

R. v Lo Shut Foo, Morris And Others

Judgment Cited authorities 4 Cited in Precedent Map Related
Vincent
Judgment Date04 May 1993
Year1993
Judgement NumberCACC521/1991
Subject MatterCriminal Appeal
CourtCourt of Appeal (Hong Kong)
CACC000521/1991 R. v. LO SHUT FOO, MORRIS and Others

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

1991, No. 521
(Criminal)

____________

BETWEEN
THE QUEEN
and
LO SHUT FOO, MORRIS
LEUNG YIU CHO
CHU WAI WAH, PIERRE

____________

Coram: Silke, V.-P., Power, V.-P. & Macdougall, J.A.

Dates of hearing: 1 - 3 December 1992

Date of judgment: 4 May 1993

_______________

J U D G M E N T

_______________

Silke, V.-P.:

1. This is the judgment of the court.

2. The applicants, Morris Lo Shut Foo - "D1" -, Leung Yiu Cho - "D2" - and Pierre Chu Wai Wah - "D3" - appeared for trial before His Honour Judge Moylan on a charge sheet which contained nine charges. The 1st charge was conspiracy to cause property to be transferred on forged documents, contrary to section 75 of the Crimes Ordinance, Cap. 200 and common law. This involved all three applicants.

3. Its particulars were that they, between 1st November 1989 and 30th June 1990, in Hong Kong, conspired together with other persons unknown, to cause the sum of $3,874,688.45 Hong Kong currency to be transferred from the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation, North Point Branch - "HKSBC North Point" - to an account of Nikko Investment Company - "Nikko" - with the Standard Chartered Bank - "SCB" - on forged documents, namely cheques numbered 962566, 962567 and 962577 drawn on the account of Toppan Printing Company (HK) Limited - "Toppan" - with HKSBC North Point and purportedly signed by Kanji Fujii and Yoshitomi Hishinuma, knowing the same to be forged and with intent to defraud.

4. The remaining eight charges concerned only D1. The 2nd charge was an alternative to the conspiracy charge and related to the same particulars but specified the date as the 23rd April 1990; the 3rd charge, again alternative to the first charge, was of similar nature, as was the 4th. Each of them related to separate cheques which had been specified generally in the conspiracy count. The 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th and 9th charges were all of possession of an identity card relating to another person, contrary to section 7A(1A) of the Registration of Persons Ordinance, Cap. 177. They referred respectively to Hong Kong Identity Card number XXXXXXX(X) in the name of Kong Kai Cheung; Hong Kong Identity Card number XXXXXXX(X) in the name of Chan Yuk Kwan; Hong Kong Identity Card number XXXXXXX(X) in the name of Chan Yan Choi; Hong Kong Identity Card number XXXXXXX(X) in the name of Au Yeung Sing; and Hong Kong Identity Card number XXXXXXX(X) in the name of Michael Rahim Chau Ming.

5. All, after trial, were convicted on the conspiracy charge and D1 was convicted on the 5th to 9th charges. D1 received a sentence of 3 years imprisonment on the 1st charge and 1 1/2 years on each of the 5th to 9th charges, with the 3 years set to run consecutively to the 1 1/2 years, giving a total sentence of imprisonment of 4 1/2 years. D2 was sentenced to a period of 3 years imprisonment on the only count concerning him, as was D3. All seek leave to appeal against their convictions and all originally sought leave to appeal against their sentences should that be necessary. D1 has abandoned his application in respect of sentence.

6. In this court, Mr. Gordon Hampton instructed by Oldham, Li & Nie appeared for D1, Mr. Ching Y. Wong, with him Mr. C.S. Fu instructed by C.M. Lee, Ho & Chow appeared for D2 and Mr. D. Marash, with him Miss J. Park instructed by Paul T.S. Lam & Co. appeared for D3. Mr. R.M. Daley appeared both at trial and in this court for the Crown.

7. There was one ground of appeal common to all the applicants and that was mainly argued by Mr. Marash. That ground as it appears in the amended perfected grounds of appeal filed on behalf of D3, reads:

"The learned judge erred in law in convicting the appellant of conspiracy to commit the statutory offence of causing property to be transferred on forged documents under section 75 Crimes Ordinance, Cap. 200, Laws of Hong Kong because there was no evidence the Appellant agreed or intended that any property should be transferred from the Hong Kong and shanghai Banking Corporation North Point Branch to the account of Nikko Investment Co. at the Standard Chartered Bank."

The same ground, though in somewhat different form, appears as ground 4 in the perfected grounds of appeal of D1 and ground 1 in the re-amended perfected grounds of appeal of D2.

8. Separately, D1 takes issue with the correctness of identifications in that it is suggested that the trial judge failed to direct himself along Turnbull guidelines; misdirected himself on the evidence he considered as supporting his view of the reliability of the identification witnesses; and erred in law in admitting oral evidence of a written document - a Guardforce insurance policy.

9. D1 further alleges an error by the judge in admitting in evidence that which came to be known as the "Toyo" documents. Also he alleges that the trial judge erred in admitting into evidence notes taken by the 11th prosecution witness of telephone calls received by her, purportedly for Nikko Investment Company. It is said that these notes were capable of use in refreshing memory but were not admissible as substantive exhibits; the contents were hearsay and inadmissible.

10. On behalf of D2 it is alleged that the trial judge erred in finding D2 to be a co-conspirator with D1 and D3 in the one conspiracy. Of this ground there were two particulars, the first sub-divided into four further particulars.

11. D3 separately takes issue with the admission into evidence of the photocopy of a cheque, exhibit 149, which had neither relevance nor probative value. Further that the trial judge erred in finding D3 had a case to answer, also that the trial judge erred in law in drawing the inference that D3 conspired with D1 and D2 because such inference was neither a compelling one nor one that no reasonable man could fail to draw on the proven facts. A final ground, also common to all three, is that the convictions are unsafe and unsatisfactory.

12. We have before us what are, in effect, two Reasons for Verdict. What happened was this. On 29th October 1991, in giving his verdict, the trial judge stated that he had written out the Reasons for Verdict which came to 30 pages. He did not intend to read all of it. He stated he would do his best to summarise that which those Reasons contained. His summary went on for 8 pages of typescript. On the same day, there was placed on record the full Reasons for Verdict.

13. With respect, this is an unfortunate practice. It can lead to confusion as between the summary and the full Reasons for Verdict. If a man is convicted he is entitled, at the time, to be informed in full of the reasons why the court has reached that conclusion. It is the better practice, particularly, where judgment is reserved, that that judgment be read out in full. In so saying, we are not unmindful of the provisions of section 80 of the District Court Ordinance, Cap. 336.

14. It was the Crown's case that D2 had at one time been employed in the trading department of the Mitsui Bank Limited, Hong Kong Branch - "Mitsui". Toppan had accounts with that bank as well as with HKSBC North Point Branch. The two joint authorised signatories in respect of both accounts were Kanji Fujii and Yoshitomi Hishinuma who were, respectively, managing director and accounts department manager of Toppan.

15. Nikko was registered on 20th March 1990 by a person naming himself as "Alfred Chan Him". It was alleged that D1 was the person who registered Nikko using that name. On 19th April 1990 D1 using the identity card of "Alfred Chan Him" obtained two Toppan cheque books from HKSBC North Point by using a forged cheque application form - the signature of the two joint signatories were forged. Those cheque books were subsequently used for the purpose of forging three cheques on Toppan's account with HKSBC North Point. The first was dated 21st April 1990, the second 23rd April 1990 and the third 25th April 1990. All these cheques were made payable to Nikko which had its account in the SCB.

16. On 25th April and 28th April 1990 arrangements were made with the security firm of Guardforce by D1 to come to two hotels. The first was the Hilton and second the Furama. The duty of Guardforce was to collect cash cheques drawn on Nikko's account and to take these cheques to the SCB, obtain cash and then to return to the hotel and hand over the cash to D1. The identification of D1 as the person who handed over the cheques and then received the cash came from the evidence of Guardforce employees. This identification is, as we have indicated, contested.

17. The SCB records showed that a cash cheque dated 25th April was on that day, and in the sum of $1,520,000, cashed. Further, on 28th April a cash cheque bearing that date and in the amount of $2,350,000 was cashed.

18. D1 checked into the Hilton Hotel on 24th April under the names of "Alfred Chan Him". He used the identity card of that person and recorded his company's name on the registration card as "Nikko Investment Company" with his occupation as Co-ordinator. He paid for the room in the Hilton in cash. He gave as his home address Room 1310, Kat Ming House, Wong Tai Sin.

19. When booking into the Furama Hotel, on 27th April, he gave the name "Chan Him" and his address as York Road 11, Kowloon Tong. It was the Crown's case that both these addresses were false as was the address given on the business registration certificate of Nikko.

20. The name "Alfred Chan", and the identity card attached to that name, was used by D1 when he opened the Nikko account with the SCB. The address he gave was 19th floor, Hong Kong Computer Centre, 54-62 Lockhart Road. The telephone number 8613321. That address is the address of the HKCC Business Centre and the...

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