R v Wong - [2001] NSWCCA 444

CITATION: R v Wong [2001] NSWCCA 444

FILE NUMBER(S): CCA 60309/01

HEARING DATE(S): 1 November 2001

JUDGMENT DATE:
1 November 2001

PARTIES :

Regina v Kai Chee Wong

JUDGMENT OF: Ipp AJA at 48; Studdert J at 1; Greg James J at 50

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: District Court

LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S) : 00/11/0462

LOWER COURT JUDICIAL
OFFICER : Shadbolt DCJ

COUNSEL : L.M.B. Lamprati (Crown)
S.L. Bell (Appellant)

SOLICITORS: S.E. O'Connor (Crown)
Ian B. Mitchell (Appellant)

LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes Act
Evidence Act

CASES CITED:
M v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 487
R v Birks (1990) 19 NSWLR 677
Browne v Dunn (1894) 6 R.67 (HL)
Allied Pastoral Holdings Pty Limited v The Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1983) 44 ALR 607

DECISION: Appeal dismissed.

60309/01

IPP AJA
STUDDERT J
GREG JAMES J

Thursday 1 November 2001

REGINA v KAI CHEE WONG

Judgment

1 STUDDERT J: The appellant, Kai Chee Wong, stood trial in the District Court charged with an offence under s 176A of the Crimes Act of defrauding the Australian and New Zealand Banking Group Limited (ANZ) in his dealings with that bank when acting in his capacity as a director of Strategic Commodities Pty Limited. After a trial of five days, the jury found the appellant guilty and following his conviction an order was made that he enter into a good behaviour bond for a period of two years.

2 The appellant appeals against his conviction.

3 On the Crown case, the opportunity for the appellant to defraud ANZ arose when the bank duplicated a transaction involving the sum of $US288,562.50 ($AUD431,269.62) and the appellant acted on the bank’s error to his own advantage by a series of investments.

4 The evidence disclosed that the appellant had considerable experience in working for banks and he had acquired a working knowledge of international banking transactions. The appellant came to Australia in 1987 and at the time of the alleged offence, and for some considerable time before that, he was employed by Pacific Asia Merchandise Pty Limited (PAM) in which Liu Chiu Wah had a controlling interest. Liu was the general manager and the appellant managed the paperwork for trade transactions and for investments. The appellant also performed clerical and administrative duties for a number of companies Liu had set up, which included Strategic Commodities Pty Limited, the company named in the indictment.

5 The appellant was a director of Strategic Commodities as well as being the manager of it. Strategic Commodities and other companies controlled by Liu were intermediaries for the sourcing of goods and commodities to sell to PAM and the goods were generally obtained from a company in Hong Kong called Wealth Court Limited, also controlled by Liu. According to the appellant, Liu carried out the necessary dealings and advised the appellant through which of the intermediary companies the arrangements were to be made, and then it was for the appellant to do the necessary administrative work. Ms Liu did not give evidence at the trial.

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading R v Wong

Details

AGLC: R v Wong [2001] NSWCCA 444
Case: [2001] NSWCCA 444
Decision Date: 1 November 2001

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Regina v Wong, the appellant, Kai Chee Wong, appealed against his conviction for defrauding the Australian and New Zealand Banking Group Limited (ANZ) in his dealings as a director of Strategic Commodities Pty Limited. The trial judge had found the appellant guilty and he appealed on several grounds. The legal issues before the court included whether the trial judge erred in rejecting evidence regarding the fate of the shares purchased with the funds, whether the trial judge should have instructed the jury on the ownership of the funds, and whether the jury's verdict was unreasonable. The court dismissed the appeal against conviction, finding that the trial judge's decisions were correct, and the jury's verdict was not unreasonable. The appellant's evidence and the circumstances of the case were such that it was open to the jury to find the appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

Orders