Lam Wai Ming v. HKSAR
Read the full judgment text of FAMC 56/2004 on BabelCite. This FAMC judgment was delivered on 15 December 2004.
1. This application has been argued by Mr Edwin Choy with great ability. But, in the final analysis, we feel unable to accede to his arguments. In relation to both points urged by Mr Choy, what the trial judge said in his reasons for verdict is open to criticism, and the way in which the Court of Appeal attempted to rationalize what the trial judge said is not entirely satisfactory either. But the reality of the whole of the case has to be considered. And when that is done, we feel able to s
|
FAMC No. 56 of 2004 IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 56 OF 2004 (CRIMINAL) (ON APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL FROM CACC NO. 44 OF 2004) _____________________ Between:
_____________________ Appeal Committee: Mr Justice Bokhary PJ, Mr Justice Chan PJ and Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ Date of Hearing: 15 December 2004 Date of Determination: 15 December 2004 ______________________________ D E T E R M I N A T I O N ______________________________ Mr Justice Bokhary PJ: 1.This application has been argued by Mr Edwin Choy with great ability. But, in the final analysis, we feel unable to accede to his arguments. In relation to both points urged by Mr Choy, what the trial judge said in his reasons for verdict is open to criticism, and the way in which the Court of Appeal attempted to rationalize what the trial judge said is not entirely satisfactory either. But the reality of the whole of the case has to be considered. And when that is done, we feel able to say with confidence that there was a sound basis for convicting and that the flaws in the reasons for the verdict are to be attributed to looseness of language only. 2.In those circumstances, we do not see any justification for letting this matter proceed to the Court of Final Appeal. With an expression of our indebtedness to Mr Choy for his able arguments, we refuse leave to appeal.
Mr Edwin Choy (instructed by Messrs Clarence Wong, Cheung & Liu) for the applicant Mr Robert S.K. Lee (of the Department of Justice) for the respondent |