Yiu Kenneth Lik Kin v Hksar

Court:Court of Final Appeal (Hong Kong)
Judgement Number:FAMC6/1997
Judgment Date:05 Dec 1997
FAMC000006/1997 YIU KENNETH LIK KIN v. HKSAR

FAMC000006/1997

FAMC No. 6 of 1997

IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 6 OF 1997 (CRIMINAL)

(ON APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL
FROM CACC 101 OF 1997)

____________________

Between :
YIU KENNETH LIK-KIN Appellant
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: 5 December 1997

Date of Determination: 5 December 1997

________________________

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

________________________

1. This is the determination of the Appeal Committee, pursuant to s32(2) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, Cap 484.

2. The applicant was, on 29 January 1997, convicted in the District Court on ten charges of using a false instrument, contrary to s73 of the Crimes Ordinance, Cap 200. These charges alleged that on ten occasions between 1st November 1994 and 2nd January 1996, the applicant had used an instrument, namely a rent receipt, which purported to show that a sum of HK$29,000 was received from him being the rental payment for Flat 24H Pak Hoi Mansion, Tai Koo Shing, which was, and which he knew or believed to be, false, with the intention of inducing a staff member of the Hong Kong Polytechnic University to accept it as genuine and by reason of so accepting it to do some act to his own or any other person's prejudice.

3. On 26 September 1997 his application for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal against conviction was dismissed. The applicant then, on the same day, asked that Court to certify under s32(2) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance that a point of great and general importance was involved in its decision but this application was likewise dismissed. The applicant now renews his application before us and seeks a certificate under s32(2) to this effect: That, on a charge under s73 of the Crimes Ordinance, extraneous evidence is not admissible to establish the falsity in the document alleged by the prosecution to be false. Counsel's submission in the court below, as summarized by the Court of Appeal in its ruling, was to the following effect:

"It is submitted that the offence of using a false instrument contrary to s.73 of the Crimes Ordinance, which...

To continue reading

Request your trial