Wong Loke Cheng v Public Prosecutor: Corruption, Bribery, and Findings of Fact in Shipping Charter Case

In Wong Loke Cheng v Public Prosecutor, the High Court of Singapore dismissed Wong Loke Cheng's appeal against his conviction and sentence for nine amended charges of corruption. Wong, an executive director at Sea Consortium Pte Ltd, was found guilty in the district court of receiving bribes from Yu Yong Jun of Fortune Glory Pte Ltd, in exchange for recommending the charter of the vessel 'Da Fu'. The High Court, presided over by Chief Justice Yong Pung How, upheld the district judge's findings on the credibility of witnesses and the weight of evidence, finding no reason to disturb the original verdict. The court also rejected the argument that the multiple instances of receiving gratification should be treated as a single composite offense under s 71(1) of the Penal Code.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Appeal Dismissed

1.3 Case Type

Criminal

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Wong Loke Cheng appealed his conviction for corruption related to bribes received for chartering a vessel. The High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the trial judge's findings.

1.7 Decision Date

10 December 2002

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party Name	Role	Type	Outcome	Outcome Type	Counsels
Wong Loke Cheng	Appellant	Individual	Appeal Dismissed	Lost	Jimmy Yim, Eugene Quah
Public Prosecutor	Respondent	Government Agency	Judgment Upheld	Won	Winston Cheng Howe Ming

3. Judges

Judge Name	Title	Delivered Judgment
Yong Pung How	Chief Justice	Yes

4. Counsels

Counsel Name	Organization
Jimmy Yim	Drew & Napier LLC
Eugene Quah	Drew & Napier LLC
Winston Cheng Howe Ming	Deputy Public Prosecutor

4. Facts

Wong Loke Cheng was an Executive Director at Sea Consortium Pte Ltd.
Yu Yong Jun was the Managing Director of Fortune Glory Pte Ltd.
Yu offered Wong bribes to recommend the charter of the vessel 'Da Fu'.
Wong received US$90,377 in bribes from Yu between July 2000 and May 2001.
The bribes were paid in cash in US dollars.
The payments were made at various locations, including Chinatown Point Foodcourt and Duxton Road.
CPIB officers raided Wong's residence and found envelopes containing US dollars.

5. Formal Citations

Wong Loke Cheng v Public Prosecutor, MA No 127 of 2002, CM No 11 of 2002, [2002] SGHC 299

6. Timeline

Date	Event
2000-06-01	Wong Loke Cheng recommended the charter of the vessel ‘Da Fu’.
2000-07-14	Wong Loke Cheng received US$8,687 as gratification.
2000-08-10	Second payment made to Wong Loke Cheng.
2000-09-09	End date for the period of the second payment.
2001-04-01	Charter of the Da Fa ended and was not renewed.
2001-05-01	Last gratification payment made to Wong Loke Cheng.
2001-06-25	Wong Loke Cheng's residence was raided by CPIB officers.
2002-12-11	High Court dismissed the appeal.

7. Legal Issues

Credibility of Witnesses
- Outcome: The court upheld the trial judge's assessment of the credibility of the prosecution witness (Yu) and rejected the defense witnesses' testimonies.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
  - Assessment of witness demeanor
  - Consistency of testimony
  - Potential bias of witnesses
- Related Cases:
  - [1992] 1 SLR 713
  - [1999] 4 SLR 87
  - [1998] 2 SLR 42
  - [1997] 3 SLR 464
  - [2000] 1 SLR 370
Findings of Fact
- Outcome: The court held that the appellate court should not disturb findings of fact unless they are clearly reached against the weight of the evidence.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
  - Weight of evidence
  - Interference by appellate court
- Related Cases:
  - [1992] 1 SLR 713
  - [1999] 4 SLR 87
  - [1998] 2 SLR 42
  - [1997] 3 SLR 464
Composite Offence
- Outcome: The court held that s 71(1) of the Penal Code did not apply, and the sentence of 10 months' imprisonment for the nine amended charges was appropriate.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
  - [1997] 3 SLR 883

8. Remedies Sought

Appeal against conviction
Appeal against sentence

9. Cause of Actions

Corruption

10. Practice Areas

Criminal Law
Appeals

11. Industries

Shipping

12. Cited Cases

Case Name	Court	Affirmed	Citation	Jurisdiction	Significance
Lim Ah Poh v PP	High Court	Yes	[1992] 1 SLR 713	Singapore	Cited for the principle that an appellate court will not disturb findings of fact unless they are clearly against the weight of the evidence.
Chua Yong Khiang Melvin v PP	High Court	Yes	[1999] 4 SLR 87	Singapore	Cited as an example of a case where the principle of not disturbing findings of fact was endorsed.
Soh Yang Tick v PP	High Court	Yes	[1998] 2 SLR 42	Singapore	Cited for the principle that an appellate court should be reluctant to overturn the trial judge’s findings when findings of fact depend on the credibility and veracity of witnesses.
Sundara Moorthy Lankatharan v PP	High Court	Yes	[1997] 3 SLR 464	Singapore	Cited as an example of a case where the principle of not disturbing findings of fact was endorsed.
Ng Chiew Kiat v PP	High Court	Yes	[2000] 1 SLR 370	Singapore	Cited for the principle that the mere fact that the complainant was unable to say with certainty when the offences took place would not without more render her entire testimony unreliable.
Zeng Guoyuan v PP (No. 2)	High Court	No	[1997] 3 SLR 883	Singapore	Cited by the appellant's counsel in support of the argument that s 71(1) of the Penal Code applied, but the court found that this argument had no merit.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute Name	Jurisdiction
Prevention of Corruption Act (Cap 241) s 6(a)	Singapore
Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68) s 261	Singapore
Penal Code (Cap 224) s 71(1)	Singapore
Prevention of Corruption Act (Cap 241) s 25	Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

Gratification
Charter
Bribes
Corruption
Findings of fact
Witness credibility
Composite offence
Voyage charter
Time charter
Personal benefits

15.2 Keywords

Corruption
Bribery
Shipping
Charter
Appeal
Singapore
Criminal Law

16. Subjects

Criminal Law
Corruption
Shipping Law

17. Areas of Law

Criminal Procedure
Sentencing
Corruption Law