HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Miscellaneous Proceedings (Criminal)2005

MAK YUEN MING v. HKSAR

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
46495-EN-2005-10-04

MAK YUEN MING v. HKSAR

HTML content

FAMC No. 37 of 2005

IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

 MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 37 OF 2005 (CRIMINAL)

(ON APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL

FROM CACC NO. 283 OF 2002)

_____________________

Between:

 MAK YUEN MINGApplicant
 and 
 HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGIONRespondent

_____________________

 

Appeal Committee: Mr Justice Bokhary PJ, Mr Justice Chan PJ and Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ
Date of Hearing: 4 October 2005
Date of Determination: 4 October 2005

 

__________________________________

D E T E R M I N A T I O N

__________________________________

 

Mr Justice Bokhary PJ:

1.  This applicant was convicted in the High Court of robbery.  His conviction was affirmed by the Court of Appeal.  He now seeks leave to appeal against that conviction to the Court of Final Appeal under the “substantial and grave injustice” limb of s.32(2) of the Court’s statute. 

2.  All the points urged in support of his application for such leave can be disposed of by saying simply this.  Although he was not present at the scene of the robbery when it was committed, there was evidence that he had participated in planning it and facilitating its execution, and that he was to receive a percentage of its proceeds.  That amounted to evidence on which the jury were entitled to convict him.  They received adequate directions from the trial judge.  And the hearings in the courts below proceeded in conformity with accepted norms.  Accordingly leave to appeal is refused.

 

 

(Kemal Bokhary)
Permanent Judge
(Patrick Chan)
Permanent Judge
(R.A.V. Ribeiro)
Permanent Judge

 

Mr Wong Po Wing (instructed by Messrs Haldanes and assigned by the Legal Aid Department) for the applicant

Ms Mary Sin (of the Department of Justice) for the respondent