plaintiff:
- HKSAR
defendant:
- MAK KWONG YIU (麥光耀) (D1)
- CHAN LAI YEE (陳麗兒) (D2)
- WONG SHUK ON (黃淑安) (D3)
- LEE YICK MING (李易明) (D4)
jurisdiction_code: HKCFA
jurisdiction_name: Court of Final Appeal of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region
case_location:
- 香港特別行政區
- Hong Kong Special Administrative Region
case_reason: >-
  HKSAR appeals against the Court of Appeal's decision (CACC No. 239 of 2021) quashing the convictions
  of the four respondents, seeking restoration of their convictions.
case_object:
- convictions
judgment_result:
- charge: Appeal by HKSAR against acquittal for conspiracy to defraud and related offences (D1-D4) (liability
    issue)
  result: Allowed. The Court restored the convictions of all four defendants. The Court of Appeal erred
    in applying the Snook sham test; the concealment of CISL's role as actual placing agent constituted
    a connected transaction under Listing Rules, and the defendants' dishonest agreement to conceal was
    sufficient for conspiracy to defraud.
judgment_summary: >-
  HKSAR appealed to restore convictions of M KWONG YIU, CHAN LAI YEE, WONG SHUK ON, LEE YICK MING for
  conspiracy to defraud. The Court of Final Appeal held the Court of Appeal erred in applying the Snook
  sham test: concealment of CISL as placing agent was a connected transaction under Listing Rules, and
  dishonest agreement to conceal sufficed for conspiracy to defraud. All four convictions restored.
involved_entities:
- entity_name: Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ
  reason: Judge in this case, agreed with the principal judgment delivered by Sir William Young NPJ.
- entity_name: Mr Justice Fok PJ
  reason: Judge in this case, agreed with the principal judgment.
- entity_name: Mr Justice Lam PJ
  reason: Judge in this case, delivered a concurring judgment providing additional reasons.
- entity_name: Mr Justice Stock NPJ
  reason: Judge in this case, delivered a concurring judgment.
- entity_name: Sir William Young NPJ
  reason: Presiding judge in this case, delivered the principal judgment allowing the appeal and restoring
    convictions.
- entity_name: HKSAR
  reason: Appellant in this case, representing the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.
- entity_name: MAK KWONG YIU (D1)
  reason: First respondent in this case, one of the defendants convicted of conspiracy to defraud.
- entity_name: CHAN LAI YEE (D2)
  reason: Second respondent in this case.
- entity_name: WONG SHUK ON (D3)
  reason: Third respondent in this case.
- entity_name: LEE YICK MING (D4)
  reason: Fourth respondent in this case.
- entity_name: CISL
  reason: Company involved as the actual placing agent, a connected person to CFHL, central to the conspiracy
    charges.
- entity_name: Gransing
  reason: Company involved as a front or disguise in the placing arrangement, used to conceal CISL's role.
- entity_name: CFHL
  reason: Company to which CISL is a connected person, relevant to the connected transaction analysis.
- entity_name: Quincy Wong
  reason: Individual with indirect interest in CISL, mentioned in connection with the concealment of CISL's
    agency.
- entity_name: Stock Exchange
  reason: Institution that would scrutinize connected transactions under the Listing Rules, relevant to
    the charges.
- entity_name: Court of Appeal
  reason: Lower court that erred in its judgment, leading to the appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.
- entity_name: Diplock LJ
  reason: Judge in Snook v London and West Riding Investments Ltd, articulated the test for determining
    sham transactions.
- entity_name: Privy Council
  reason: Court in Adams v The Queen, illustrated that conspiracy to defraud can be charged without resorting
    to the concept of sham.
