HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Magistracy Appeal1995

R. v. CHOW CHUEN KAN

Related cases with same parties

  • CAAR10/1994R. v. CHING WAI FAN, CARINA
  • CAAR12/1994R. v. TUEN Shui Ming and Another
  • CAAR13/1993R. v. WONG SHU KAN
  • CAAR3/1993R. v. NG SHEUNG CHUN
  • CAAR3/1995R. v. YU YUN HEI
  • CAAR5/1993R. v. KWOK CHI KEUNG
  • CAAR5/1995R. v. LEUNG KWOK CHUNG
  • CAAR9/1995R. v. CHAN SIU YUN
  • CACC100/1993NG YUK HUNG and Others v. R.
  • CACC100/1995R. v. CHAN LAM
  • CACC100/1996R. v. LI CHI MING
  • CACC101/1994CHAN CHONG HEI v. R.
  • CACC10/1994TAM Shing-li v. R.
  • CACC10/1996R. v. AU YEUNG CHI MAN
  • CACC102/1993LEE WING ON v. R.
  • CACC102/1994R. v. CHEUNG KIN SHING and Others
  • CACC102/1995R. v. LAI FOR-SHUN and Another
  • CACC102/1996R. v. CHOI MAN HAY
  • CACC103/1994CHAN KWOK-HING v. R.
  • CACC103/1996R. v. FUNG CHI SHING and Another
16521-EN-1995-12-12

R. v. CHOW CHUEN KAN

HTML content

HCMA000830/1995

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY APPEAL No.830 of 1995

______________

BETWEEN
THE QUEENRespondent
and
CHOW CHUEN KANAppellant

______________

Coram: Hon. Duffy, J. in Court

Date of hearing: 6 December 1995

Date of handing down judgment: 12 December 1995

________________

J U D G M E N T

________________

1. This was an appeal against a conviction for Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm and for a sentence of four months passed therefor.

2. The allegation against the appellant was that he had caused injury to the victim by throwing a bottle at her. The evidence was that the appellant had a disagreement with the victim in a convenient shop at Cheung Fat Estate, as a result of which he tried to hit her with a bottle. He in fact missed her but the bottle smashed against the wall, and when she tried to pick up some of the fragments, she cut her hand.

3. The Crown case clearly was that it was the assault with the bottle which had caused the victim actual bodily injury. The facts did not support the charge. Although the appellant had tried to hit the victim with the bottle, he had missed her, and the resultant cut came from attempts by the victim to pick up the bottle fragments. He was subsequently also alleged to have punched the victim on her face, but that is not the subject matter of the charge.

4. For the reason that the evidence did not support the conviction, I had to allow the appeal.

(J.M. Duffy)
Judge of the High Court

Representation:

Mr Tam, Yiu-ho Willian C.C., for Crown

Mr John Marray, (D.L.A.), for Appellant re appeal against conviction Appellant : Chow Chuen Kan in person