HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Magistracy Appeal2002

HKSAR v. WONG KUN CHEONG

Related cases with same parties

  • CAAR11/1997HKSAR v. YIP CHI TUNG
  • CAAR1/1998HKSAR v. LING VERONICA
  • CAAR12/1996HKSAR v. WONG KWONG YICK
  • CAAR6/1998HKSAR v. LAU SHIU KONG AND ANOTHER
  • CAAR6/2012HKSAR v. LEUNG KWOK CHI
  • CAAR9/2001HKSAR v. WONG TO LEUNG
  • CACC100/1997HKSAR v. YU HON CHUN
  • CACC100/1999HKSAR v. LAM CHI KIN
  • CACC100/2000HKSAR v. SHING KUEN KIN
  • CACC100/2001HKSAR v. OU YANG MING CHYUAN
  • CACC100/2002HKSAR v. CHAN LAI SING AND ANOTHER
  • CACC100/2003HKSAR v. CHENG CHONG SHING
  • CACC100/2022HKSAR v. LIMBU PRASHANT
  • CACC101/1997HKSAR v. YIU KENNETH LIK KIN
  • CACC101/2001HKSAR v. LEUNG KWAI PING
  • CACC101/2021HKSAR v. WONG CHI FUNG AND ANOTHER
  • CACC10/1997HKSAR v. MAN KAM SHING
  • CACC10/1998HKSAR v. CHAN CHUN TAK
  • CACC10/2001HKSAR v. TAM KWAI KEUNG AND ANOTHER
  • CACC10/2002HKSAR v. WONG WAN SHAN
19152-EN-2002-04-09

HKSAR v. WONG KUN CHEONG

HTML content

HCMA000242/2002

HCMA242/2002

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO.242 OF 2002

(ON APPEAL FROM WSMP 36 OF 2002)

----------------------

BETWEEN
HKSARRespondent
AND
WONG KUN CHEONGAppellant

-----------------------

Coram: Deputy High Court Judge Wong in Court

Date of Hearing: 9 April 2002

Date of Judgment: 9 April 2002

-------------------------

J U D G M E N T

-------------------------

1. For the reasons I have indicated in the course of argument by the appellant and counsel for the Government, I am satisfied there is no merits in this appeal.

2. There is no evidence, by that I mean direct and admissible evidence, to support his complaint to enable the magistrate to issue a private summons for private prosecution. That being the case whether his argument on the interpretation of the law is correct or not is irrelevant.

3. In my view, I think the magistrate was right in his interpretation of the law and I would accept his argument and reject the argument advanced by the appellant. This is a completely unmeritorious application and equally an unmeritorious appeal. The appeal must be dismissed. I make an order for costs under section 120 of the Magistrates Ordinance, and fix the amount at $5,000.

( Michael Wong )
Deputy High Court Judge

Representation:

Mr Kwok Wing Lung, SGC of DPP, for HKSAR

The Appellant in person, present