Tang & Ku

𝗙𝘂𝗹𝗹 𝗧𝗲𝗮𝗺 𝗼𝗳 𝗧𝗮𝗻𝗴 & 𝗞𝘂 𝗮𝗰𝗰𝗿𝗲𝗱𝗶𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗶𝗻 𝗗𝗼𝘆𝗹𝗲’𝘀 𝗖𝗿𝗶𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗟𝗮𝘄 𝗚𝘂𝗶𝗱𝗲 𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟰

Congratulations to the full team of Tang & Ku for being listed on the Doyle's Guide – Hong Kong Leading Criminal Lawyers 2024.

Tang & Ku is recognised as a 𝗙𝗶𝗿𝘀𝘁 𝗧𝗶𝗲𝗿 𝗟𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗖𝗿𝗶𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗗𝗲𝗳𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗟𝗮𝘄 𝗙𝗶𝗿𝗺 in Hong Kong. Additionally, our partner Eric Tang is individually identified as 𝗟𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗖𝗿𝗶𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗟𝗮𝘄𝘆𝗲𝗿 and 𝗟𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗪𝗵𝗶𝘁𝗲 𝗖𝗼𝗹𝗹𝗮𝗿 𝗖𝗿𝗶𝗺𝗲, 𝗖𝗼𝗿𝗽𝗼𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗖𝗿𝗶𝗺𝗲 & 𝗥𝗲𝗴𝘂𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘆 𝗜𝗻𝘃𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗴𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗟𝗮𝘄𝘆𝗲𝗿; whilst our other partner, Yvonne Ku, is named in the top rank of 𝗣𝗿𝗲𝗲𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗖𝗿𝗶𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗟𝗮𝘄𝘆𝗲𝗿𝘀 as well as 𝗟𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗪𝗵𝗶𝘁𝗲 𝗖𝗼𝗹𝗹𝗮𝗿 𝗖𝗿𝗶𝗺𝗲, 𝗖𝗼𝗿𝗽𝗼𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗖𝗿𝗶𝗺𝗲 & 𝗥𝗲𝗴𝘂𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘆 𝗜𝗻𝘃𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗴𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗟𝗮𝘄𝘆𝗲𝗿𝘀. Acacia Chan, our associate, is also listed as 𝗥𝗶𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝗿 𝗶𝗻 𝗖𝗿𝗶𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗟𝗮𝘄.

We extend our gratitude to Doyle's Guide for their recognition, and to our peers and clients for their continuous support.

At Tang & Ku, we specialise in criminal defence work. If you are seeking legal representation or advice in criminal law and regulatory investigations, please contact us on +852 3583 5200 or +852 9191 9159 (24/7) or visit our website at www.tangandku.com.

www.tangandku.com

It is not uncommon for the date of birth listed on a travel document to be incorrect, and often the individual possessing the document is unable to amend the error for want of an official birth record from the past, or through no fault of him or her.

The CFA in HKSAR v Li Qing Bin [2024] HKCFA 9 has certified the below questions as being of great and general importance :

(1) Is the principle of automendacity discussed in HKSAR v Chan Kam Ching (2022) 25 HKCFAR 48 applicable in respect of a charge of using a false travel document under s42(2)(b) of the Immigration Ordinance (IO);

(2) In considering if a traveller’s use of a travel document with an inaccurate date of birth constituted a contravention of ss42(1)(a) or 42(2)(b) of the IO, especially in the context of verification by automated means under s4A of the IO, whether the Court should pay regard to his contemporaneous explanation that the date of birth recorded on the travel document was incorrect;

(3) When a travel document issued by an official authority contained an inaccurate date of birth and it could not be rectified due to lack of official register of date of birth, whether the date of birth is a false material particular and the use of such travel document constituted offences under ss42(1)(a) and/or 42(2)(b) of the IO;

(4) When considering whether a traveller has the mens rea for the offences under ss42(1)(a) and/or 42(2)(b) of the IO in the scenario set out in Q(3), does the Court need to find that the traveller knew that the date of birth was a material particular when he used the travel document;

(5) If the answer to Q(4) is “No”, is there an implied defence of reasonable excuse for the offences under ss42(1)(a) and/or 42(2)(b) of the IO?

These questions could set important legal precedents regarding the interpretation of the IO and the responsibilities of individuals when their official documents contain inaccuracies that are not their fault. The determination reflects the CFA’s recognition of the broader legal and social implications of the case, which could affect many individuals and influence the administration of justice in immigration matters.

The Correct Test in Magistracy Appeals under section 113 of the Magistrates’ Ordinance

The Appellant in HKSAR v Hui Lai Ki [2024] HKCFA 7 was charged with theft. Her defence that she forgot to pay due to personal distractions was rejected by the Magistrate at trial. Her conviction was upheld by the Court of First Instance, where it was held that the Magistrate’s rejection of the Appellant’s explanation as to why she forgot to pay was “a conclusion that the trial Magistrate could reach”. The Judge added that he would not intervene with the Magistrate’s findings of fact because they were “not plainly wrong, illogical or inherently improbable”.

The Court of Final Appeal reiterated that an appeal under section 113 of the Magistrates Ordinance (Cap 227) is by way of rehearing on the evidence before the trial court, supplemented by such further evidence as the intermediate appellate court may admit under its statutory power to do so. Notwithstanding the limitations that a judge hearing an appeal may have because he or she does not have the advantage of receiving the evidence of witnesses first-hand, it remains the duty of the appellate court to come to its own conclusion on disputed issues of law or fact, and, in particular, whether an appellant’s guilt is proved beyond reasonable doubt on the evidence before the court on the appeal.

In this regard, the CFA held that the “plainly wrong” test, used by the Court of Appeal in civil appeals, is not an appropriate test for appellate interference with findings of fact or credibility in a section 113 appeal. The “plainly wrong” test is held to be inconsistent with the judge’s duty to come to his or her own conclusion on whether the appellant’s guilt is proven beyond reasonable doubt.

For the full text of the judgement, please visit: https://legalref.judiciary.hk/lrs/common/ju/ju_frame.jsp?DIS=159193&currpage=T

www.tangandku.com

We are thrilled to announce that Tang & Ku has been honoured with the title of Best Law Firm 2024 by the Hong Kong Commercial Times 香港商業時報 . The awards presentation held yesterday brought together leaders and executives of the business world, celebrating achievements and excellence across various industries.

Tang & Ku's journey began with a shared vision to create a law firm that would redefine client service, prioritising attention and tailoring strategies to the unique needs of each case. The title is a milestone that reflects both our professional ethos and our collaborative spirit. Our partners Eric Tang and Yvonne Ku, along with the entire Tang & Ku team, extend our heartfelt gratitude to the Hong Kong Commercial Times 香港商業時報 for recognising our efforts.

If you or someone you know is facing criminal investigation and wants to know how we can assist you, please reach out to us directly on +852 3583 5200 or +852 9191 9159 (24/7) or visit our website at www.tangandku.com.

鄧子揚顧嘉恩律師行非常高興地宣布本行榮膺香港商業時報頒發 2024年「年度最傑出律師事務所」榮譽。獲得此殊榮，不僅是對鄧子揚顧嘉恩律師行團隊一直以來努力不懈的肯定，也是對本行未來的鼓勵。在未來的日子裏，本行將繼續秉承我們專業的核心價值觀，為客戶提供更加優質的法律服務。

鄧子揚顧嘉恩律師行是一所專注於刑事辯護工作的律師行，如你或你的朋友需要尋求法律協助，請即透過電話（+852 3583 5200 或 +852 9191 9159）聯絡我們，或瀏覽我們的網頁 www.tangandku.com。

www.tangandku.com

On behalf of Tang & Ku, we wish you and your loved ones good health, happiness, and prosperity in the Year of the Dragon. May this new year bring you abundant opportunities and fulfillment in all aspects of life.

As we embrace the spirit of the Lunar New Year, let us also reflect on the values of determination, resilience, and unity. We would like to express our gratitude to our dedicated team of professionals who work tirelessly to uphold the highest standards of excellence, and we remain committed to providing exceptional legal services and guidance throughout the year ahead.

www.tangandku.com

HKSAR v Chan Chu Leung [2024] HKCFA 1 raises an important question as to the scope of a criminal defendant’s right of silence in the context of later allegations of police impropriety.

This appeal arises out of the Appellant’s conviction of attempting to traffic in co***ne.

The Police intercepted cartons of air cargo, inside which were bags of powder containing co***ne. The bags of co***ne were replaced with dummy bags containing baking powder, and the dummy bags were dusted with fluorescent powder.

Under caution, the Appellant remained silent. Traces of fluorescent powder were found on his nail clippings.

The issue at trial was whether the Appellant had knowledge that he was dealing with dangerous drugs. When giving evidence, the Appellant testified that he had no such knowledge. Instead, a person called Ah Chu had asked him to undertake a casual job to move some goods. The Appellant also implied in his testimony that a police officer had caused the fluorescent powder to come into contact with his nails.

During cross-examination, the Appellant was asked why he failed to mention Ah Chu to anyone before trial, and why he did not complain about the fluorescent evidence before trial. In summing-up, while the trial judge gave a specific direction for the jury to ignore the part of the cross-examination concerning Ah Chu, no specific direction (except for a general direction that an accused has a right to silence and that the exercise of it should not be used against him in any way) was given concerning the cross-examination on the lack of complaint about the fluorescent powder.

Leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal was granted in respect of the following question (and confined to the Appellant’s complaints arising out of the fluorescent powder cross-examination), namely:

“When it is common ground that a defendant has maintained his pre-trial right to silence, is it permissible for the prosecution to question or make use of:

(a) the defendant’s pre-trial lack of or late complaint regarding police impropriety during the investigation giving rise to the charge?

(b) the defendant’s pre-trial lack of or late disclosure, whether in the form of a complaint or not, about a matter other than ‘the occurrence of an offence, the identity of the participants and the roles which they played’ but nonetheless addressing a piece of incriminating evidence?”

The CFA answered the question of law in the negative.

Applying the law as set out in the answer to the question of law posed, the fluorescent powder cross-examination was objectionable as infringing the appellant’s right of silence. However, the CFA held that the infringement was relatively minor in the context of the trial as a whole. The CFA further held that with the general directions given by the trial Judge, there was no material risk that the jury would have embarked on an impermissible line of reasoning. Accordingly, the trial Judge’s directions had cured any unfairness caused to the Appellant and the appeal was dismissed.

It is important to note that the CFA has emphasised in this judgement that there is no general obligation on an accused to disclose the nature of his defence, save for the statutory obligation to give an alibi notice or notice of expert evidence. So far as a Case Management Questionnaire requiring parties to identify trial issues is concerned, the CFA acknowledged that, to be consistent with the right of silence, the questionnaire should be construed as entitling a defendant to respond by stating simply that he puts the prosecution to strict proof, thereby maintaining his right of silence.

For the full text of the judgement, please visit: https://legalref.judiciary.hk/lrs/common/ju/ju_frame.jsp?DIS=157276&currpage=T

www.tangandku.com

May this Christmas season bring you moments of peace, happiness, and togetherness. May you find joy in the company of loved ones and create cherished memories that will warm your heart for years to come.

www.tangandku.com

Throwback to the LexisNexis®40 Under 40 Award Ceremony which served as a networking hub, bringing together young legal minds in Singapore on 23 November 2023 to connect, exchange ideas, and foster collaborations.

www.tangandku.com

LexisNexis®40 Under 40 Award Ceremony

We extend our warmest congratulations to our partner, Yvonne Ku, for her achievement at the LexisNexis 40 under 40 ceremony held on 23 November 2023 in Singapore. As we celebrate her success, let us also renew our commitment to fostering a legal profession that embraces diversity, inclusion, and the pursuit of justice for all.

LexisNexis®律商聯訊「40 位 40 歲以下精英」頒獎典禮

本行祝賀我們的合夥人顧嘉恩律師 出席了於 2023 年 11 月 23 日在新加坡舉行的 LexisNexis® 40 under 40 律商聯訊「40 位 40 歲以下精英」頒獎典禮，並獲頒發獎座。在慶祝顧嘉恩律師的成就的同時，本行也承諾希望可以為建立更具包容性和追求正義的社會做出貢獻。

www.lexisnexis.com.hk/40under40
www.tangandku.com

Professor in Yoga Ball Murder Wins CFA Appeal for Murdering Wife and Daughter

The appellant was unanimously convicted after trial of two counts of murder over the deaths of his wife and their child in 2018. The mother and daughter died of carbon monoxide poisoning after a leaking yoga ball containing the gas was found deflated in the boot of their car in which they were travelling.

The appellant’s application for leave was dismissed by the Court of Appeal which also refused to certify two points of law for which the appellant sought a certificate to pursue an appeal to the Court of Final Appeal (CFA). The CFA today unanimously allowed the appellant’s appeal, set aside his convictions, and ordered a retrial on the charges on murder following a finding that the trial Judge’s directions were a misdirection in law.

As the facts of the case were most unusual and the mechanics of the alleged murders were exceptional, requiring a number of questions to be determined by the jury, the CFA was not persuaded that the hypothetical reasonable jury, properly directed, would inevitably have convicted. For these reasons, the CFA concluded that this case was not an appropriate one for the application of the proviso to section 83(1) of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance, Cap 221.

For the full text of the judgement, please visit: https://legalref.judiciary.hk/lrs/common/search/search_result.jsp?isadvsearch=1&hsf=1&txtselectopt=4&txtSearch=FACC&txtselectopt1=3&txtSearch1=&txtselectopt2=7&txtSearch2=KHAW+KIM+SUN&txtselectopt3=6&txtSearch3=&txtselectopt14=10&txtSearch14=&txtselectopt15=4&txtSearch15=&txtselectopt16=8&txtSearch16=&txtselectopt17=5&txtSearch17=&selSchct=FA&selSchct=CA&selSchct=HC&selSchct=CT&selSchct=DC&selSchct=FC&selSchct=LD&selSchct=OT&selallct=1&selcourtname=&selcourtype=&selDatabase=JU&order=1&SHCAF=&page=1

www.tangandku.com

Yvonne Ku Named as LexisNexis® 40 UNDER 40 in 2023

Please join us in giving a huge congratulations to our Partner, Yvonne Ku, on being named LexisNexis® 40 UNDER 40 in 2023.

LexisNexis® 40 UNDER 40 is an annual initiative that recognises and celebrates the achievements of outstanding legal professionals under the age of 40. This recognition is bestowed upon individuals who show tremendous potential to grow and motivation to lead the development of the legal sector in Greater China (Mainland China, Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan). The award signifies Yvonne Ku’s exceptional abilities and her ongoing commitment to professional growth and development.

See the full list of winners and their in-depth profiles: https://www.lexisnexis.com.hk/40under40

顧嘉恩律師獲律商聯訊 LexisNexis®評為「40位40歲以下精英」

我們的合夥人顧嘉恩律師獲 2023 年律商聯訊 LexisNexis® 評為「40位40歲以下精英」。

律商聯訊「40位40歲以下精英」榜單評選出40 位年齡在40 歲以下的法律界專業人士，表揚他們於大中華地區（中國内地、香港、澳門及台灣）的法律界發展所展現的潛力和取得的成就。該獎項標誌著顧嘉恩律師的卓越表現以及她對法律界發展的貢獻。

得獎者的完整名單及其詳細資料：https://www.lexisnexis.com.hk/40under40

www.tangandku.com

May the round moon bring happiness to you and your family. Happy Mid-Autumn Festival.

www.tangandku.com

Ambiguous Verdict of Jury & Sentencing

‘It is a fundamental principle that a sentence should be consistent with the jury’s verdict and supported by evidence. When there is only one possible interpretation of the jury’s verdict, the judge must sentence on that basis. Otherwise, if there is more than one possible interpretation, the judge should, applying the criminal standard of proof, determine the factual basis upon which to pass sentence on a consideration of the evidence at trial. The judge is entitled to reach his own view of the facts relevant to sentencing provided that such view is not inconsistent or in conflict with the verdict. He is not bound to accept the version of facts most favourable to the defendant. However, if “there is more than one possible interpretation, and he is not sure of any of them, then (in accordance with basic fairness) he is obliged to pass sentence on the basis of the interpretation (whether in whole or in relevant part) most favourable to the defendant.”’

The appellant in HKSAR v Dinh Ka Yan, Gigi [2023] HKCA 1100 was found guilty by the jury of trafficking in a dangerous drug. In sentencing, the appellant argued that she should be sentenced on the basis that only some of the drugs were for trafficking whilst the rest of the drugs were for her own consumption, as the factual implication of the jury’s verdict was ambiguous.

The Court of Appeal is of the view that the sentencing Judge was mindful of the relevant legal principles when assessing the evidence in determining the factual basis upon which to pass sentence, and that the Judge had applied the criminal standard of proof in rejecting the appellant’s defence that the drugs were for her own consumption. The appellant’s appeal is dismissed accordingly.

For the full text of the judgement, please visit: https://legalref.judiciary.hk/lrs/common/ju/ju_frame.jsp?DIS=155078&currpage=T

www.tangandku.com

We are thrilled to announce that our partners, Eric Tang and Yvonne Ku, are recognised by Who’s Who Legal as one of their most recommended individual lawyers in Business Crime Defence for the year 2023. Eric is also listed as one of their most recommended lawyers for Mainland China & HKSAR – Business Crime Defence & Investigations.

These recognitions solidify Tang & Ku’s reputation as a trusted and reliable legal resource for individuals and businesses facing legal challenges in the realm of business crime defence.

本行的兩位合夥人鄧子揚律師和顧嘉恩律師榮獲《法律名人錄》(Who’s Who Legal) 評選為 2023 年度商業罪行刑事辯護律師最受推薦的個人律師之一。鄧子揚律師更同時被評選為中國大陸和香港特別行政區—商業犯罪辯護和調查最受推薦的個人律師之一。

鄧子揚顧嘉恩律師行致力於在商業罪行的刑事辯護領域為面臨法律挑戰的個人以及企業提供有效及值得信賴的法律意見及全方位的協助，並於在業界贏得了良好的聲譽。

www.tangandku.com

Congratulations to our Partner, Yvonne Ku, on passing the final oral assessment conducted by the Guangdong Lawyers Association for her Greater Bay Area qualification. Following her successful completion of the pre-examination legal training, her passing of the GBA Legal Professional Examination, her completion of the post-examination training and her passing of the latest oral assessment, Yvonne will be able to obtain the GBA Lawyer’s Licence (Guangdong-Hong Kong Macao Greater Bay Area) and provide legal services on specified civil and commercial matters in the nine Mainland municipalities in the GBA, namely Guangzhou, Shenzhen, Zhuhai, Foshan, Huizhou, Dongguan, Zhongshan, Jiangmen and Zhaoqing.

廣東省律師協會今天向通過粵港澳大灣區法律知識培訓、律師執業考試、考試合格人員集中培訓以及面試考核的港澳律師發出面試考核結果合格通知。本行的合夥人顧嘉恩律師順利獲得大灣區律師執業申請資格，並可在領取粵港澳大灣區執業證後在廣州、深圳、珠海、佛山、惠州、東莞、中山、江門、肇慶等大灣區內地九市提供部分民商事法律服務。

www.tangandku.com

Last Friday, our partner Yvonne Ku was invited to Guangdong Zekeng Law Firm (廣東澤康律師事務所) in Foshan to deliver a seminar on the Hong Kong criminal justice system and the introduction of Tang & Ku.

In the seminar, Yvonne delved into the key aspects of the Hong Kong criminal justice system and explored how Tang & Ku plays a significant role in the legal landscape. Participants also compared and contrasted the court and jury system of Hong Kong with that of Mainland China.

By understanding the key components of the Hong Kong criminal justice system and the services offered by Tang & Ku, participants gained valuable insights into the legal landscape and the importance of quality legal representation in criminal cases in Hong Kong.

我們的合夥人顧嘉恩律師於上星期五獲邀到訪位於廣東省佛山市的廣東澤康律師事務所為該所的合夥人及律師介紹有關香港的刑事司法制度及鄧子揚顧嘉恩律師行的研討會。

在研討會上，顧嘉恩律師探討了香港刑事司法制度的關鍵組成部分，並分享了鄧子揚顧嘉恩律師行如何在香港刑事法律領域發揮重要作用。與會者亦比較和對比了香港和內地兩地不同的法庭制度和陪審團制度。

通過了解香港刑事司法制度的關鍵組成部分以及鄧子揚顧嘉恩律師行提供的服務，與會者就香港刑事案件中的法律格局以及在港獲得優質法律代表的重要性等範疇獲得了寶貴的意見。

www.tangandku.com

The Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) published its 2022-2023 Annual Report on 21 June 2023. The report provides an overview of the SFC’s enforcement priorities and regulatory engagement.

Cracking down on investment fraud and social media ramp and dump scams remains the SFC’s enforcement priority. Joint operations have been conducted with the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) and the Hong Kong Police Force where a suspected ringleader and other key members of a sophisticated ramp and dump syndicate were arrested. Going forward, it is expected that the SFC’s ongoing enforcement efforts to deter corporate fraud and virtual-asset related misconduct will continue.

To tackle Hong Kong-Mainland cross-boundary financial crimes, the SFC has also worked closely with the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) to strengthen their cross-boundary enforcement cooperation.

For full report, please visit: https://www.sfc.hk/-/media/EN/files/COM/Annual-Report/2022-23/SFC-Annual-Report-2022-23_Eng.pdf?rev=b5b1057167b446cb9e0feb78e1140d78

香港證券及期貨事務監察委員會（證監會）於 2023 年 6 月 21 日發布了 2022-2023 年年報。該報告闡述了證監會的重點執法工作和監管合作情況。

打擊投資詐騙及社交媒體「唱高散貨」騙局繼續是證監會的重點執法工作。證監會與廉政公署和香港警務處展開聯合行動，拘捕了當中包括一個涉嫌組織嚴密的「唱高散貨」集團的懷疑主腦及其他骨幹成員。展望未來，我們預期證監會將繼續採取執法行動，打擊企業欺詐和虛擬資產相關的失當行為。

為打擊香港與內地跨境金融犯罪，證監會亦與中國證監會緊密合作，加強跨境執法方面的合作。

年報全文請見：https://www.sfc.hk/-/media/TC/files/COM/Annual-Report/2022-23/SFC-Annual-Report-2022-23_Chi.pdf?rev=d37f4c2ec39d445fa1b93c64cc653202

www.tangandku.com

Our partner Yvonne Ku visited Foshan Lawyers Association and attended the Guangdong Enterprise Legal Service Forum last Friday on 16 June 2023 under the arrangement of the Law Society of Hong Kong. The third Forum discussed issues of interests to enterprises and legal practitioners in the Greater Bay Area and the trip offered opportunities for us to exchange views and ideas with lawyers in Foshan and other GBA cities.

本行的顧嘉恩合夥人律師於上星期五 2023 年 6 月 16 日在香港律師會的安排下前往佛山市律師協會進行交流，並參與了在佛山市舉辦的第三屆廣東企業法律服務論壇。該論壇分享了進一步優化完善法制營商環境的各項議題，也提供了機會讓我們和粵港澳大灣區律師互相了解。

www.tangandku.com

We are most delighted and proud to announce that Tang & Ku and our entire criminal defence team have been identified by our peers and clients for our expertise and abilities in the areas of criminal defence and white collar crimes in the Doyles Guide 2023. We congratulate our partners Eric Tang and Yvonne Ku as well as our associate Acacia Chan for being recognised in the following categories:

Leading Criminal Lawyers
Eric Tang: Preeminent
Yvonne Ku: Leading

Leading White Collar & Corporate Crime & Regulatory Investigations Lawyers
Eric Tang: Leading
Yvonne Ku: Recommended

Rising Stars
Acacia Chan: Rising Star

Additionally, Tang & Ku is also listed amongst the Leading Criminal Defence Law Firms. These recognitions serve as a testament to our team’s unwavering commitment and dedication to the interests of our clients and the criminal law. We extend our gratitude to our clients, our fellow practitioners, and our amazing team at Tang & Ku.

鄧子揚顧嘉恩律師行和我們的全體律師憑藉在刑事辯護和白領罪行、公司罪行以及監管調查等商業罪案領域的出色表現入選 2023 年度 Doyle's Guide 以下的刑事律師領域排名，引證業界和客戶對本行和本行刑事辯護團隊的高度認可。我們祝賀鄧子揚合夥人律師、顧嘉恩合夥人律師和陳珮茹律師獲得下列榮譽：

領先的刑事律師
鄧子揚合夥人律師榮獲傑出刑事律師榮譽 (Preeminent)
顧嘉恩合夥人律師榮獲領先刑事律師榮譽 (Leading)

領先的白領罪行、公司罪行和監管調查罪行律師
鄧子揚合夥人律師榮獲領先刑事律師榮譽 (Leading)
顧嘉恩合夥人律師榮獲推薦刑事律師榮譽 (Recommended)

刑事辯護律師的新星
陳珮茹律師榮獲刑事辯護律師的新星榮譽 (Rising Star)

同時，鄧子揚顧嘉恩律師行也被選為本年其中一間領先刑事辯護律師行 (Leading Criminal Defence Law Firms)。本行的刑事辯護團隊一直致力協助客戶在面對各種刑事指控時進行辯護，並為他們的案件盡可能取得最好的結果。本行在此向我們的客戶、同行以及我們的優秀團隊表示感謝。

Leading Criminal Defence Law Firms 2023 Doyle’s Guide listing:
2023 年度 Doyle’s Guide領先的刑事律師行排名：
https://doylesguide.com/leading-criminal-defence-law-firms-hong-kong-2023/

Leading Criminal Lawyers 2023 Doyle’s Guide listing:
2023 年度 Doyle’s Guide 領先的刑事律師排名：
https://doylesguide.com/leading-criminal-defence-lawyers-hong-kong-2023/

Leading White Collar Crime, Corporate Crime & Regulatory Investigations Lawyers 2023 Doyle’s Guide listing:
2023 年度 Doyle’s Guide 領先的白領罪行、公司罪行和監管調查罪行律師排名：
https://doylesguide.com/leading-white-collar-crime-corporate-crime-regulatory-investigations-lawyers-hong-kong-2023/

Rising Stars 2023 Doyle’s Guide listing:
2023 年度 Doyle’s Guide刑事辯護律師的新星名單：
https://doylesguide.com/criminal-law-rising-stars-hong-kong-2023/

www.tangandku.com

Appeal allowed in Choy Yuk Ling case

Today the Court of Final Appeal unanimously quashed Choy Yuk Ling's conviction on two counts of knowingly making a false statement in a material particular for the purpose of obtaining a certificate. The appellant applied for a Certificate of Particulars of Vehicle during the production of a programme for RTHK and claimed that her purpose of so applying was for “other traffic and transport related matters”.

Although the CFA held that the Commissioner for Transport is entitled to require an applicant to state the purpose of an application for certificates, they are of the view that the appellant’s statement as to her purpose of applying was not false on the grounds that the subcategory of "other traffic and transport related matters” should be interpreted broadly as a catchall for any activities related to traffic or transport matters. The CFA further held that there was no reason that genuine investigative journalism should be excluded from such subcategory.

Further, the CFA held that the phrase “other traffic and transport related matters” was ambiguous and a journalist in the appellant’s position could be honestly mistaken that journalistic purpose would fall into the subcategory, given the volume of certificates issued on the application of media and news agencies. Therefore, the Court could not draw irresistible inference that the appellant knowingly made a false statement.

For a summary of the judgement, please visit: https://legalref.judiciary.hk/doc/judg/html/vetted/other/en/2023/FACC000002_2023_files/FACC000002_2023ES.htm

For the full text of the judgement, please visit:
https://legalref.judiciary.hk/lrs/common/ju/ju_frame.jsp?DIS=152985&currpage=T

www.tangandku.com

Following today's judgment from the Court of Final Appeal in HKSAR v Chen Keen (alias Jack Chen), Hao May (formerly known as Wang May Yan) (alias May Wang) and Yee Wenjye (also known as Yu Wenjie) (alias Eric Yee), FACC Nos 3, 4 & 5 of 2023 (heard together) on appeal from CACC No 185 of 2021 [2023] HKCFA 11, a defendant will not be able to seek costs of an aborted trial until the end of the criminal process:

“In short, absent an outcome favourable to the defendant, where a trial comes to an end prematurely or otherwise does not result in a verdict and a new trial has to be convened, the trial stage of the criminal process is still ongoing, and there is no reason to give the court a power to award costs to the defendant, or for that matter, the prosecution.”

For the full text of the judgment, please visit: https://legalref.judiciary.hk/lrs/common/ju/ju_frame.jsp?DIS=152756&currpage=T

www.tangandku.com

Appeal Dismissed in the Quarry Bay Shooting Case

The applicant who killed two and wounded two other family members in Quarry Bay Park in 2018 applied for leave to appeal against conviction and sentence.

Her two grounds of appeal against conviction were that (1) the legal burden on her to prove diminished responsibility was unfair and infringed her right to a fair trial and the presumption of innocence, and that it should be read down to an evidential burden; and (2) the judge failed to give a full and proper lies direction.

In a judgment handed down yesterday, the CA found no merit in the applicant’s grounds of appeal and dismissed her appeal.

For a summary of the judgment, please visit: https://www.tangandku.com/2023/05/20/appealdismissedinthequarrybayshootingcase

For the full text of the judgment, please visit: https://legalref.judiciary.hk/lrs/common/search/searchbox_result.jsp?txtselectopt=4&isadvsearch=0&selDatabase=ALL&selDatabase=JU&selDatabase=RV&selDatabase=RS&selDatabase=PD&stem=1&selall=1&ncnValue=&ncnParagraph=&ncnLanguage=en&txtSearch=cacc+153%2F2021&query=Go%21&selSchct=FA&selSchct=CA&selSchct=HC&selSchct=CT&selSchct=DC&selSchct=FC&selSchct=LD&selSchct=OT&selallct=1

www.tangandku.com

As provisions of the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorist Financing (Amendment) Ordinance 2022 which address various miscellaneous and technical issues under the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorist Financing Ordinance, Chapter 615 (“AMLO”) will come into effect on 1 June 2023, the Companies Registry has issued a revised Guideline on Compliance of Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorist Financing Requirements for Trust or Company Service Providers to provide guidance to those who hold a licence to carry on a trust or company service business in Hong Kong granted or renewed under the AMLO.

For the full text of the revised Guideline, please visit:
https://lnkd.in/g_C2TMC3

www.tangandku.com