R. v. LEE HAU WAI

R. v. LEE HAU WAI

The appeal was dismissed because the magistrate had properly considered relevant factors including the appellant's key role in instigating the damage and the age discrepancy; the disparity with the co-accused did not demonstrate an error warranting interference.

Citation
R. v. LEE HAU WAI
Parties
Respondent/crown: THE QUEEN; Appellant/defendant: LEE HAU WAI; Co Accused/defendant: Tsang Man Lung
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
9 June 1995
Case Number
HCMA448/1995
Procedural Posture
Magistracy Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Sentencing Disparity, Procuring Criminal Damage, Community Service Versus Imprisonment, Compensation Orders
Source Language
EN

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

THE QUEEN

Respondent/crown

LEE HAU WAI

Appellant/defendant

Tsang Man Lung

Co Accused/defendant

Procedural Posture

Magistracy Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

  1. 1 Whether disparity in sentences between co-accused warrants appellate interference
  2. 2 Whether appellant's role as instigator justifies a heavier sentence
  3. 3 Appropriateness of compensation and custodial sentence imposed

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the magistrate had properly considered relevant factors including the appellant's key role in instigating the damage and the age discrepancy; the disparity with the co-accused did not demonstrate an error warranting interference.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Dismissal of appeal; original sentence of three weeks' imprisonment and payment of compensation totalling $2000 upheld