8 Oct 2025法庭線#7398
Father of Kwok Fung-yee denies attempting to deal with absconder’s property; insurance agent says defendant revealed plans to meet Kwok to sign documents
遭警方國安處通緝的「香港民主委員會」執行總監郭鳳儀，其 68 歲父親郭賢生被指企圖處理她的保單，被起訴「23 條」下企圖處理潛逃者財產罪。被告否認控罪，案件周三（8 日）在西九龍裁判法院開審。
獲控方豁免起訴的保險代理供稱，涉案保單為親子升學儲蓄保險，由被告在郭鳳儀 1 歲時購買，並一直由被告供款。被告今年 1 月初稱女兒不在港，欲取消保單，又指與女兒商量後，對方同意將保單持有人轉為父親，並透露將與郭鳳儀會面，「到時我就帶埋啲表格過去簽名」。
辯方指，郭鳳儀於 2015 年滿 18 歲時，保險公司曾向被告及郭鳳儀發出保單權益轉移信件，惟郭鳳儀從沒簽署回條，至今亦沒繳交任何保費。保險代理同意。
The 68-year-old father of Kwok Fung-yee, executive director of the Hong Kong Democracy Council who is wanted by the Police National Security Department, Kwok Yin-sang was accused of attempting to deal with her insurance policy and charged under “Article 23” with attempting to deal with an absconder’s property. The defendant denied the charge. The case opened at West Kowloon Magistrates’ Courts on Wednesday (8th).
An insurance agent who was granted immunity from prosecution by the prosecution testified that the policy in question was a parent-child education savings insurance policy purchased by the defendant when Kwok Fung-yee was one year old, with the defendant continuing to pay the premiums. In early January this year, the defendant said his daughter was not in Hong Kong and wanted to cancel the policy. He also said that, after discussing it with his daughter, she had agreed to transfer ownership of the policy to her father, and revealed that he would meet Kwok Fung-yee, saying, “Then I’ll bring the forms over for her to sign.”
The defence said that when Kwok Fung-yee turned 18 in 2015, the insurance company sent letters concerning the transfer of policy rights to the defendant and Kwok Fung-yee, but Kwok never signed the acknowledgement and had not paid any premiums to date. The insurance agent agreed.
8 Oct 2025法庭線#7399
Three alleged members of Hong Kong Democratic Founding Alliance charged with conspiracy to commit secession; 15-year-old boy intends to plead guilty
4 名男子被指為「香港民主建國聯盟」成員，參與在台灣成立旨在推動「港獨」的組織。其中 ，15 歲男生與兩男子被起訴《國安法》串謀分裂國家罪。案件周三（8 日）在區院提訊，辯方指男生擬認罪，希望在他本月滿 16 歲前判刑，而控方亦不反對分開處理。
不過法官郭偉健指索取報告需時，未能做到，指判刑之時男生滿 16 歲，其姓名可被公開。辯方最終同意押後至 10 月 31 日正式答辯。其餘兩成年被告則待申請法援，押後至 11 月 27 日再訊。3 被告繼續還押候訊。
Four men were alleged to be members of the Hong Kong Democratic Founding Alliance and to have participated in establishing an organisation in Taiwan aimed at promoting Hong Kong independence. The 15-year-old boy and two other men were charged under the National Security Law with conspiracy to commit secession. The case was mentioned in the District Court on Wednesday (8th). The defence said the boy intended to plead guilty and hoped he could be sentenced before turning 16 this month; the prosecution did not object to the cases being dealt with separately.
However, Judge Kwok Wai-kin said it would take time to obtain the report and that this could not be done. He said the boy would be 16 when sentenced and that his name could then be made public. The defence ultimately agreed to adjourn the case to 31 October for a formal plea. The two adult defendants are awaiting applications for legal aid, and their case was adjourned to 27 November for a further hearing. All three defendants remain remanded in custody pending trial.
8 Oct 2025法庭線#7400
Man Serving Sentence for Riot Offence Acquitted of Hiding Gun and Ammunition; Judge Rejects Police Expert Evidence
2020 年 6 月，一名射擊競技場職員被指在住所，藏有手槍、彈匣及彈殻等物品，被警方國安處起訴「無牌管有槍械及彈藥」罪。他不認罪受審，周三（8 日）在西九龍裁判法院（暫代區域法院）獲裁定罪名不成立。
暫委法官劉綺雲指，被告是「槍癡」，涉案手槍能參加氣槍比賽，只能放特定彈匣，不能放普通彈匣， 而子彈有機會是裝飾品。她同意沒證據顯示，店員、被告懂得分辨真槍及玩具槍，被告有可能意外買到真槍。官亦指，不信納警方軍械法證課專家的供詞。
In June 2020, a shooting-range employee was accused of keeping a handgun, magazines and cartridge cases at his residence. He was charged by the Police National Security Department with unlicensed possession of firearms and ammunition. He denied the charge and stood trial, and was found not guilty on Wednesday (8th) at West Kowloon Magistrates’ Courts, sitting as the District Court. Acting Judge Lau Yee-wan said the defendant was a “gun enthusiast”. The handgun could be used in air-gun competitions and could only take a specific type of magazine, not a standard magazine, while the bullets might have been decorative items. She agreed there was no evidence that the shop employee or the defendant knew how to distinguish real guns from toy guns, and that the defendant might have accidentally bought a real gun. The judge also said she did not accept the testimony of an expert from the police firearms forensic section.
8 Oct 2025集誌社#7403
10.1｜“"Gau wu" group” Uncle Wu accused of “sedition”; arrested at Causeway Bay station, to report in November
Channel We HK 等網媒直播片段顯示，當日下午近三時，身穿淺色恤衫及長褲、持環保袋的吳伯，在銅鑼灣港鐵站出閘處，被數名便衣警員帶往站內一個職員通道內。通道的鐵門隨即被關上、門口有至少五名機動部隊警員駐守。約五分鐘後，吳伯在警員押解下從鐵門步出，由十多名便衣及軍裝警員包圍，離開地鐵站、被帶上警車。當時他身上已不見原來隨身的環保袋。
警方今（8日）回覆《集誌社》查詢指，於十月一日拘捕一名 89 歲本地男子，涉嫌「出於煽動意圖作出具煽動意圖的作為」，又指他已獲准保釋候查，須於十一月向警方報到。但在被截查前警方發現他有何行為、有否搜查其住所、是否有禁足令等，警方則沒有回應。
Livestream footage from Channel We HK and other online media showed that at about 3pm that afternoon, Wu Bo, wearing a light-coloured shirt and trousers and carrying an eco-bag, was taken by several plainclothes police officers from the exit gates of Causeway Bay MTR station to a staff passage inside the station. The passage’s metal gate was immediately closed, with at least five Riot Police officers stationed outside. About five minutes later, Wu Bo stepped out through the gate under police escort, surrounded by more than 10 plainclothes and uniformed officers. He left the station and was taken into a police vehicle. His original eco-bag was no longer with him at the time.
The police told The Collective on the 8th that they had arrested a local man aged 89 on 1 October on suspicion of “doing an act with seditious intention”, and said he had been released on bail pending investigation and was required to report to police in November. However, the police did not respond when asked what he had been doing before he was stopped, whether his residence had been searched, or whether he was subject to a restriction on leaving the area.
6 Oct 2025集誌社#7394
7.14 Sha Tin | Chief superintendent suffers finger fracture; court orders To Kai Wa to pay over $150,000; Tou: Finally comes to an end
2019 年 7 月 14 日，沙田新城巿廣場爆發警民衝突，示威者杜啟華被指咬斷警長手指等，在刑事案中就襲警、傷人等 4 罪，被判囚 5 年半。在衝突中被杜用雨傘擊打導致手指骨折的時任高級警司梁子健，循民事向杜索償。
區域法院法官羅麗萍周一（6 日）頒判詞指，杜啟華欲呈案發片段，以證明沒接觸梁，惟此片段已在刑事案獲充分考慮，屬「已裁定事實」，指杜濫用司法程序。就杜稱，梁沒使用合適防護裝備致受傷，官斥他顛倒是非、諉過於人，裁定杜須向梁賠償逾 15 萬元。
杜啟華在判決後表示，「19 年到 25 年，悠長嘅法律爭議嘅旅途，終於告一段落，幾好吖」。他指，現時經濟狀況「幾麻麻」，但會盡量履行應有法律責任，「繼續守法啦，希望未來有機會讀返法律啦」。
On 14 July 2019, clashes between police and protesters broke out at New Town Plaza in Sha Tin. Demonstrator To Kai Wa was accused of biting off a sergeant’s finger and, in a criminal case, was sentenced to five and a half years in prison for four offences including assaulting police and wounding. Leung Tsz-kin, then a senior superintendent whose finger was fractured after Tou struck him with an umbrella during the clashes, pursued compensation from Tou in a civil case.
District Court judge Phillis Lai Ping Loh said in a judgment handed down on Monday (6th) that To Kai Wa had sought to submit footage of the incident to prove that he had not come into contact with Leung. However, the footage had already been fully considered in the criminal case and constituted “facts already adjudicated”, the judge said, ruling that Tou had abused the legal process. In response to Tou’s claim that Leung’s failure to use suitable protective equipment had caused the injury, the judge rebuked him for reversing right and wrong and shifting blame, and ordered Tou to pay Leung more than $150,000 in compensation.
After the judgment, To Kai Wa said: “From 2019 to 2025, the long journey of legal disputes has finally come to an end. That’s pretty good.” He said his current financial situation was “not great”, but that he would do his best to fulfil his legal responsibilities, “continue to obey the law, and hopefully have the opportunity to study law again in the future.”
1 Oct 2025HK01#7381
National Day fireworks: Police arrest mainland man at Edinburgh Place over alleged drone offences
今日（1日）國慶日，煙花匯演於晚上8時在維多利亞港上空上演。警方今晚在中區愛丁堡廣場拘捕一名20歲內地男子，他涉嫌「未有在指明時間內操作無人機」及「無人機的飛行高度高於指明的飛行高度」，現正被扣留調查。據了解，男子持雙程證抵港。
案件交由中區警區刑事調查隊第二隊跟進。行動中，人員檢獲一部小型無人機。
The National Day fireworks display was held over Victoria Harbour at 8pm today (1 October). Police arrested a 20-year-old mainland man at Edinburgh Place in the Central district tonight. He is suspected of operating a drone outside the specified hours and flying a drone above the specified altitude, and is being detained for investigation. The man is understood to have entered Hong Kong on a two-way permit.
The case has been referred to the Second Team of the Central District Crime Investigation Team for follow-up. Officers seized a small drone during the operation.
30 Sept 2025法庭線#7369
One convicted of conspiracy to defraud over $4.73 million through 100% guarantee loans using false information; judge says evidence showed multiple coincidences
4 名男女涉提供虛假資料，透過中小企百分百擔保貸款計劃，詐騙銀行批出逾 473 萬元貸款，被警方國安處起訴串謀欺詐、洗黑錢等 4 罪。其中被告張昊揚早前在「光城者案」認罪，在本案獲撤控。另兩名被告先後認罪，餘下 1 人周二（30 日）在區域法院被裁定 1 項串謀詐騙罪成。
暫委法官溫紹明指， WhatsApp 紀錄顯示，被告曾著主謀將炒賣手錶所得的 50 萬元，撥入公司收入，以便第二度申請「百分百貸款」時將金額提高。而在兩人討論當日，主謀指示員工偽造單據，報稱公司收到 50 萬元訂金。官認為證據間出現「多重巧合」，不可能發生，串謀詐騙罪成。
至於另一項串謀詐騙罪，官指被告雖曾提議主謀申請貸款時，修改公司租金紀錄，對話可疑，但控罪是指控被告更改公司薪金紀錄及營業額，故裁定罪名不成立。3 名罪成被告，除早前認罪的女被告獲准保釋，其餘兩人均須還押，案件押後至 10 月 14 日判刑。
Four men and women were accused of providing false information to defraud banks into approving more than $4.73 million in loans under the SME 100% Guarantee Loan Scheme. They were charged by the Police National Security Department with four offences, including conspiracy to defraud and money laundering. Defendant Cheung Ho-yeung had earlier pleaded guilty in the “Gwong Sing Ze” case and had the charges in this case withdrawn. Two other defendants subsequently pleaded guilty, while the remaining defendant, Chow, was convicted on Tuesday (30th) in the District Court of one count of conspiracy to defraud.
Acting judge Jason Siu Ming Wan said WhatsApp records showed that the defendant had asked the mastermind to transfer $500,000 earned from trading watches into the company’s income so that the amount could be increased when applying for a 100% guarantee loan for a second time. On the day the two discussed the matter, the mastermind instructed an employee to forge documents claiming that the company had received a $500,000 deposit. The judge found that the “multiple coincidences” in the evidence could not have occurred, and convicted the defendant of conspiracy to defraud.
As for another conspiracy-to-defraud charge, the judge said the defendant had proposed that the mastermind alter the company’s rental records when applying for a loan, and the conversation was suspicious. However, the charge alleged that the defendant had altered the company’s salary records and turnover, so the defendant was acquitted. Of the three convicted defendants, the female defendant who had pleaded guilty earlier was granted bail, while the other two were remanded in custody. The case was adjourned to 14 October for sentencing.
30 Sept 2025法庭線#7370
Lam Cheuk-ting denies obstructing Chan Heng-pan and Holden Chow at LegCo; James Tien says Lam was concerned about his health and he sensed no one intended to hurt anyone
立法會 2019 年審議《逃犯條例》修訂法案，法案委員會「鬧雙胞」。建制派護送石禮謙主持會議時被民主派議員阻止，林卓廷否認妨礙陳恒鑌、周浩鼎兩罪，官裁定表證成立，案件周二（30 日）進入第三日審訊，官押後 10 月底結案陳詞，11 月初裁決。
林卓廷選擇作供，稱在會議前已接受石為合法的主持，亦得悉他曾接受心臟手術，故向石表明當日不會有激烈行為。而現場嘈雜，林望石聽到其意見，故走到石的後方，並觸碰其左手手臂，希望引起石注意，期間亦曾要求石暫停會議，「唔想任何人受傷」。
辯方亦傳召石禮謙作供。他供稱，事發時只有范國威及朱凱廸曾嘗試搶咪，林卓廷在旁關心他的身體，問「無問題啊嘛？OK 嘛？」，石又指，沒一刻感受到有人襲擊他，沒感受到有人欲傷害他人，亦沒感受到林對自己有任何威脅，認為林屬「不積極阻止」一員。
The Legislative Council considered the Fugitive Offenders Ordinance amendment bill in 2019, while the Bills Committee held two parallel meetings. When pro-establishment lawmakers escorted James Tien to chair a meeting, pan-democratic lawmakers tried to stop them. Lam Cheuk-ting denied two charges of obstructing Chan Heng-pan and Holden Chow. The judge ruled that there was a case to answer. The trial entered its third day on Tuesday (30th), and the judge adjourned the case for closing submissions in late October and a verdict in early November.
Lam Cheuk-ting chose to testify, saying that before the meeting he had accepted that Tien was the lawful chair and knew that Tien had undergone heart surgery. He therefore told Tien that there would be no violent conduct that day. As the scene was noisy, Lam wanted Tien to hear his views, so he went behind Tien and touched his left arm to attract his attention. He also asked Tien to suspend the meeting, saying he “didn’t want anyone to get hurt”.
The defence also called James Tien to testify. He said that at the time of the incident only Gary Fan and Eddie Chu had tried to seize the microphone. Lam Cheuk-ting was concerned about his health and asked, “Are you all right? OK?” Tien also said that he never felt attacked, never felt that anyone intended to hurt anyone else, and never felt threatened by Lam. He considered Lam to be among those who were “not actively stopping” the obstruction.
29 Sept 2025法庭線#7368
Agape Garden appeals over removal of mooncakes; director says FEHD suspected illegal food production and stresses they were not made at warehouse
2024 年 8 月，社企「膳心小館」月餅疑遭投訴來歷不明，被食環署查封貨倉內大批月餅，至同年 12 月再檢走該批月餅。「膳心小館」按《公眾衞生及市政條例》向法庭申訴，要求頒令撤銷食環署決定及賠償，周一（29 日）在觀塘裁判法院開審。
公司董事供稱，不會在涉案貨倉內製造月餅，指倉內部分月餅，是在公司另一持食物製造牌照的廠房製作，在門市獲客人認購後，再送贈有需要的長者。她指，署方職員巡查時稱「懷疑非法生產食物」，又追問月餅來源，而在月餅被封存後首兩星期，食環署「差唔多日日都上嚟，聲稱要睇吓、行個圈同影相」。
董事又指，食安中心職員其後上門稱欲購買月餅，她拒絕指月餅用作捐贈、不予購買，惟職員堅持從封存的紙箱內取走月餅，「佢哋扔低錢拎走啲月餅」，最終報警處理。案件周二續。
In August 2024, a large quantity of mooncakes belonging to the social enterprise “Agape Garden” was sealed by the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department (FEHD) at a warehouse after an alleged complaint that their origin was unclear. The same batch was removed by the department in December. Agape Garden filed a complaint with the court under the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance, seeking an order to quash the FEHD’s decision and compensation. The case opened at Kwun Tong Magistrates’ Courts on Monday (29th).
The company’s director testified that the company did not make mooncakes at the warehouse in question. She said some of the mooncakes there had been produced at another company factory holding a food manufacturing licence, and were then given to needy elderly people after customers subscribed for them at the shop. She said department officers stated during an inspection that they “suspected illegal food production” and asked about the source of the mooncakes. During the first two weeks after the mooncakes were sealed, FEHD officers came “almost every day, claiming they wanted to have a look, walk around and take photographs”.
The director also said Centre for Food Safety officers later visited and said they wanted to buy mooncakes. She refused, saying the mooncakes were intended for donation and were not for sale, but the officers insisted on taking mooncakes from the sealed boxes. “They left money and took the mooncakes,” she said. The police were eventually called. The case continues on Tuesday.
26 Sept 2025法庭線#7356
League of Social Democrats street-station illegal fundraising case: Chan Po-ying denied final leave to appeal; CFA finds no reasonable grounds
社民連被指 2021 年在街站展示 Patreon 二維碼非法籌款一案，主席陳寶瑩就定罪提出上訴，去年 8 月被高院暫委法官姚勳智駁回，今年 2 月再被拒絕批出上訴至終審法院證明書。
陳寶瑩其後直接向終院申請上訴許可，終院上訴委員會周五（26 日）拒絕其申請，指案件無合理給予上訴許可的理由。換言之，陳寶瑩無法再透過上訴挑戰原訟庭決定。
文件顯示，是次終院上訴委員會由終院常任法官李義、林文瀚，及非常任法官陳兆愷組成。
In the case in which the League of Social Democrats was alleged to have illegally solicited donations by displaying a Patreon QR code at a street station in 2021, chairperson Chan Po-ying appealed against her conviction. The appeal was dismissed by Deputy High Court Judge Yiu Fan-chi last August, and a certificate for an appeal to the Court of Final Appeal was refused in February this year.
Chan Po-ying subsequently applied directly to the Court of Final Appeal for leave to appeal. The Court of Final Appeal’s Appeal Committee rejected her application on Friday (26th), saying there were no reasonable grounds for granting leave to appeal. In other words, Chan Po-ying can no longer challenge the Court of First Instance’s decision through an appeal.
The documents show that the Appeal Committee comprised permanent judges of the Court of Final Appeal Li Yee and Lam Man-hon, and non-permanent judge Patrick Siu Oi Chan.
Translations are supplied by the source workbook. Consult the original reporting for context.
