HKSAR v. WONG WAI

FAMC No. 1 of 1998

IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 1 OF 1998 (CRIMINAL)

(ON APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL

FROM CACC No. 265 OF 1997)

_____________________

_____________________

___________________________

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

___________________________

Mr Justice Ching PJ:

1. The applicant faced three charges in the District Court. He was convicted upon his own plea of the second and third charges that he had been in possession of false instruments and that he had been in possession of equipment for making false instruments contrary to sections 75(1) and 76(1) of the Crimes Ordinance, Cap. 200. He pleaded not guilty to but was convicted of the first charge that he had used false instruments contrary to section 73 of the same Ordinance. His appeal to the Court of Appeal was dismissed. Subsequently that Court refused to certify that a point of law of great and general public importance was involved. He now brings the matter before us.

2. The applicant, a man called Zhou Rui-xiong and the latter's wife were shareholders in a limited company, Ankon International Limited, which had been incorporated in Hong Kong in March of 1994. The three shareholders were also the directors of the company and the applicant was also its secretary. It had done no business and the trial Judge found that at the time of the offence it had two bank accounts containing a total of less than $2,000. In November of 1996 Zhou and the applicant, together with a man called Lau Chi-hung, met with senior officials of the Bank of East Asia. They showed the officials what purported to be nine certificates of deposit issued by the China Construction Bank. Eight of them were in the sum of US$8,000,000 each and the ninth was in the sum of US$10,000,000. Six of them showed the depositor to be Ankon. It was proposed that for a service charge of 1 per cent of the face value of the certificates the Bank of East Asia should accept them for safe custody upon which Lau would advance to Zhou 35 per cent of their face value. They also had with them five purported certificates of the China Construction Bank confirming the issue of the certificates of deposit. The officials of the Bank of East Asia were suspicious of the certificates which were then left with them for verification. None of these matters was ever in dispute. On that and other evidence the trial Judge found that the certificates were forgeries, that the applicant knew that they were forgeries and that he had the necessary intent when he used them or was a party to them being used in the manner described.

3. So far as can be ascertained, the applicant, who now represents himself, argues a number of evidential and factual matters. It is enough to say that matters such as these are for the trial Judge whose Reasons for Verdict contains a careful and lucid rehearsal of the factors which led him to conclude that the certificates were false to the knowledge of the applicant. There is no reason for us to interfere with those findings.

4. The application to the Court of Appeal for a certificate apparently related to a point of law which it was said was one of great general and public importance. That argument has not been repeated before us and we do not deal with it. In addition, the application is out of time and no adequate explanation for that has been given. There is no merit whatsoever in this application and it is dismissed.