HKSAR v. Lau Ming Chu

Read the full judgment text of CACC 225/2004 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 19 January 2005 before Cheung JA, Yeung JA, Reyes J.

Criminal law – appeal – certificate on points of law – Court of Final Appeal – presumption of resulting trust – use in criminal proceedings – application by motion – great and general importance – whether proposed points arise from the case – prior appellate judgment confirming findings based on evidence rather than presumption – application dismissed as misconceived. The applicant, who had been convicted in the District Court (DCCC 175/2004), appealed to the Court of Appeal (CACC 225/2004), which delivered judgment on 27 September 2004. By motion dated 18 October 2004, the applicant sought a certificate on points of law for consideration by the Court of Final Appeal. The proposed points asked whether a criminal trial judge can rely on the presumption of resulting trust, a presumption of fact developed in civil proceedings, as a basis for finding an essential fact to establish guilt; what criteria govern reliance, use, and application of the presumption in a criminal trial; and whether a conviction is per se unsafe and unsatisfactory if the trial judge wrongly relied on the presumption. The Court of Appeal held that the application was misconceived because the points of law did not arise in the case. The appellate court had already pointed out that the trial judge's finding that the applicant and her husband had a financial interest in the property and that the applicant had knowledge about it was based on evidence, not on presumptions. The argument that the Court of Appeal had not found the trial judge had not relied on the presumption was therefore not available to the applicant. The application for a certificate on points of law was dismissed.

Legal issues: Whether to grant a certificate on points of law for consideration by the Court of Final Appeal

Outcome: Application for a certificate on points of law dismissed.

Cited by 5 cases

Case No.CACC 225/2004
Court
Court of Appeal
Date19 Jan 2005
JudgeCheung JA, Yeung JA, Reyes J
Case Document
100%Judiciary

CACC 225/2004

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. CACC 225 OF 2004

(On Appeal From District Court Criminal Case No. 175 of 2004)

______________________

BETWEEN

  HKSAR Respondent
  and  
  LAU MING CHU 劉明珠 Applicant

______________________

Before : Hon Cheung JA, Hon Yeung JA and Hon Reyes J in Court

Date of Hearing : 19 January 2005

Date of Judgment : 19 January 2005

______________________

J U D G M E N T

______________________

Hon Cheung JA (giving judgment of the court) :

1.The applicant by motion dated 18 October 2004 applied for a certificate on points of law for consideration by the Court of Final Appeal.  The following points of law of great and general importance are said to be involved in our judgment delivered on 27 September 2004 :

a) “Can a trial judge in a criminal case rely on or make any use of (whether partly, substantially or entirely) “the presumption of resulting trust”, which is a presumption of fact developed and used in civil proceedings, as a basis for the finding of an essential fact to establish guilt?”,
   
b) “Being the first known case in which reliance on “the presumption of resulting trust” by a criminal trial judge is being challenged, what are the criteria for the reliance, use and/or application of “the presumption of resulting trust” in a criminal trial?”, and/or
   
c) “If a trial judge in a criminal case had, to some extent, wrongly relied on or taken into account “the presumption of resulting trust” in his finding of guilt, and the Court of Appeal did not find that the trial judge had not relied on or taken into account “the presumption of resulting trust”, was such a conviction per se unsafe and unsatisfactory?”

2.In our view this application is misconceived.  The points of law simply do not arise in the present case.  We have already pointed out in our judgment that the finding by the judge that the applicant and her husband had a financial interest in the property and the applicant’s knowledge about this matter was based on evidence and not on presumptions.  To say that this court did not find that the judge had not relied on or taken into account the presumption of resulting trust is an argument that is simply not available to the applicant in the light of our judgment.

3.The application is dismissed.

(Peter Cheung) (Wally Yeung) (A. T. Reyes)
Justice of Appeal Justice of Appeal Judge of the Court of First Instance

Mr. William Tam, SGC of Department of Justice for the Respondent

Mr. Lawrence Hui, instructed by Messrs Hagon Wai & Partners for the Applicant

Other Judgments in This Case

Further hearings and rulings under CACC 225/2004