Chan Chan Cheung v. HKSAR

FAMC000006/2000

(Not for Circulation)
FAMC No. 6 of 2000

IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 6 OF 2000 (CRIMINAL)

(ON APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL

FROM HCMA NO. 532 OF 1999)

_____________________

_____________________

Appeal Committee: Mr Justice Litton PJ, Mr Justice Bokhary PJ and Mr Justice Silke NPJ

Date of Hearing: 3 July 2000

Date of Determination: 3 July 2000

_________________________

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

_________________________

Mr Justice Litton PJ:

1. This is the determination of the Appeal Committee.

2. The applicant, an Assistant Divisional Officer of the Fire Services Department, was convicted at the Shatin Magistracy in May 1999 on two charges of soliciting an advantage, contrary to s. 3 of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance, Cap. 201. His appeal to the High Court (Yeung J) against his convictions was dismissed on 1 April 2000. His subsequent application to Yeung J to certify that a point of law of great and general importance was involved in the appeal was likewise dismissed. He now renews his application before us, seeking leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.

3. In essence the prosecution case against the applicant was that, in April 1998, he had asked two fire services officers junior to him in rank to lend him money. The applicant admitted that he had contacted the two officers and had asked if they had spare money : His intention, he said, was not to solicit loans, but to see if they would pay him cash for his car : He was in extreme financial difficulties at the time and needed money urgently.

4. The magistrate, after a careful assessment of the evidence, found that the principal prosecution witnesses were truthful and reliable; she rejected the applicant's testimony and that of his witness, a Mr Chiu. She therefore found the applicant guilty as charged.

5. No point of law was involved in the appeal to Yeung J and none has been identified in the material put before us. There is no suggestion that grave and substantial injustice arises from the convictions.

6. The application for leave is dismissed.

Representation:

Mr Chan Chan Cheung, the Applicant, in person

Mr Joseph To SGC (of Department of Justice) for the Respondent