CACC 38/2022

[2025] HKCA 826

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 38 OF 2022

(ON APPEAL FROM HCCC NO 75 OF 2021)

________________

________________

______________________________________

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

______________________________________

Hon K Yeung J (giving the Reasons for Judgment of the Court):

A. Introduction

1. This is the applicant’s application to “ renew ” [1] his application for leave to appeal which Zervos JA on 15 January 2024 dismissed [2] .

2. Two features of the application should first be noted:

(a) The application’s Notice of Renewal of Application after Refusal by the Single Judge (the “ Form XIII ”) was lodged late [3] . It was 8 days out of the mandatory 14-day period; and

(b) More fundamentally, whilst the Form XIII has been lodged, the application it initiated is strictly speaking not a renewal application. That is because the applicant is no longer relying on the sole perfected ground of appeal that was argued before Zervos JA (the “ Refused Perfected Ground ”) [4] . The applicant is seeking instead to put forward a number of new grounds (the “ New Grounds ”) that are outwith the Refused Perfected Ground.

3. The hearing took place on 13 August 2025. Despite the above, this Court heard the applicant on the New Grounds. We reiterate the importance of keeping time limits. But in the present case, the applicant is acting in person. The delay, at least in so far as the filing of Form XIII is concerned, is not serious. The merits of the New Grounds (or lack of any) would inform this Court as to whether leave should be granted to the applicant to amend the Refused Perfected Ground, and whether to extend time for him to file his Form XIII.

4. At the conclusion of the hearing, we refused the applicant’s application for extension of time to file the Form XIII, dismissed his application for leave to appeal, and dismissed his appeal. We said that we would give our full reasons within 3 months. We now do.

B. The Indictment, and the conviction

5. The Indictment is dated 22 March 2021. It contains a single count of attempted rape, contrary to sections 118(1) and 159G of the Crimes Ordinance, Cap 200 . The particulars of offence are that the applicant “ on 16 ^th day of May, 2020, near Hong Kong Parkview, Wong Nai Chung, in Hong Kong, attempted to rape female ‘X’ ”.

6. The trial subsequently took place before Deputy Judge Maggie Wong SC (the “ Judge ”) and a jury. The applicant was represented by counsel (the “