HKSAR V. CHAN KAM CHING (陳鑑清)
Outcome
Appeal allowedI would allow the appeal and quash the appellant’s convictions for offences under CO sections 73 and 74. I would also reject the submission that substitution of an alternative offence pursuant to CPO section 83A would be appropriate.
Source: [2022] HKCFA 7, Court of Final Appeal, decided 14 April 2022. Read directly from the judgment.
Counsel (8)
Parties (2)
Summary
Chan Kam Ching, a solicitor, appealed against his conviction for using a false instrument in connection with property dealings under the Small House Policy. The Court of Final Appeal held that on the true construction of the Crimes Ordinance, the solicitor's document was not 'false' as it told a lie about itself rather than its contents. The appeal was allowed and the convictions were quashed.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (21)
Citation influence
HKLII records this judgment as cited by 8 later judgments. This counts every later Hong Kong judgment that references this case, which is broader than the resolved citations listed above.
Related cases
Other Hong Kong judgments involving the same parties or counsel.
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Hong Kong Courts portal.
Read on HKLIISource: HKLII ([2022] HKCFA 7)