HKSAR v. LAM SAI KIT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 51 OF 1998

(On appeal from TWC 1820 of 1997)

____________

____________

_______________

J U D G M E N T

_______________

1. The Appellant, a man is in his late 40's, faced three charges of possession of dutiable goods and three charges of possession for sale of cigarettes the packets of which bear no health warnings and contents of tar group. Appearing before T.H. Casewell Esquire sitting in the Magistrate's Court at Tsuen Wan, he pleaded not guilty to all the charges. The trial lasted a number of days and on 11th November 1997, the Appellant was convicted of all six charges.

2. This appeal involves an attack upon the Magistrate's decision to admit into evidence the confession statement which he eventually relied upon in convicting the Appellant as he did.

3. There were here circumstances surrounding the taking of that confession statement which called for careful consideration as to whether they ought to have resulted in the exclusion of the statement on the basis of oppression, unfairness or the like. The Magistrate did give the matter careful consideration, and then came to the conclusion that the statement ought to be admitted.

4. Mr Matthews for the Appellant has argued in effect that this conclusion was not properly open to the Magistrate. I am unable to agree. The Magistrate received all the evidence at first-hand and heard all the arguments and formed a careful assessment of the situation.

5. In my judgment, there is no proper foundation for upsetting that assessment. So despite the very able argument presented by Mr Matthews, this appeal is dismissed.