Restaurant owner convicted for assault wins appeal

Court of Final Appeal written judgment explaining why they overturned the conviction of a restaurant owner who allegedly attacked an Environmental Protection Department inspector – the last case handled by retired Chief Justice Geoffrey Ma Tao-li.

Lo Kin-sun, a chef and an owner of a restaurant in Tai Po, was accused of assaulting an Environmental Protection Department inspector by punching him on the nose.

He was unrepresented in court and was convicted for a charge of common assault by Fanling Court Magistrate Debbie Ng Chung-yee.

Lo was sentenced to four weeks’ imprisonment and suspended for 18 months. 

Justice Joseph Paul Fok who delivered Court of Final Appeal's reasons for judgment wrote that Lo is cleared from the conviction as he was denied a fair trial and a disbursement of HK$12,539 shall be awarded to him. 

The reasons for judgment stated Ng accepted the evidence given by the two Environmental Protection Department officers who visited Lo in March 2017, one of them is the inspector involved and another is his supervisor. 

In the trial, the prosecution accused Lo of coming out of his restaurant’s kitchen and angered by the inspector’s presence and punched him on the nose.

Lo denied the accusation and suggested the two officers were concocting their evidence of the assault, which Ng disbelieved and convicted him.

The reasons for judgment stated since Lo was unrepresented, it was Ng’s duty to assist him in the conduct of his defense and to conduct a fair and impartial trial. 

However, Ng did not address discrepancies in the evidence given by the two Environmental Protection Department officers, including when Lo left the kitchen and when he allegedly committed the offense.

Ng also has only asked the inspector 10 questions in the course of cross-examination but asked Lo 60 questions.

The Court of Final Appeal held that Ng’s failure to address those inconsistencies and assist Lo in putting those inconsistencies to the two officers, together with her conduct of questioning Lo when she was assisting him to cross-examine the officers, had denied Lo a fair trial.