HKSAR v. WAN YICK TAK

HKSAR v. WAN YICK TAK

Although the original sentence of two months was not manifestly excessive given the need for deterrence in prison, the court found the identical sentence for differently charged defendants risked legitimate grievance; accordingly the appeal was allowed in part by ordering one month to run concurrently to mark the difference between offences while leaving the custodial element intact.

Citation
HKSAR v. WAN YICK TAK
Parties
Appellant: Appellant; Respondent: HKSAR; Co Defendant: 2nd Defendant
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
30 May 2013
Case Number
HCMA189/2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeal against sentence allowed in part; sentence adjusted to mark disparity between offences.
Legal Topics
Common Assault, Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm, Totality Principle, Consecutive Sentences, Mitigation, Plea Discount, Sentencing Disparity
Source Language
EN
Criminal Law Prison Discipline Sentencing Common Assault Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm Totality Principle Consecutive Sentences Mitigation +2 more

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 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Appellant

Appellant

HKSAR

Respondent

2nd Defendant

Co Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether 2 months imprisonment for common assault was manifestly excessive
  2. 2 Whether sentence should run consecutively to existing sentence
  3. 3 Whether parity between co-defendants justified adjustment

Ratio Decidendi

Although the original sentence of two months was not manifestly excessive given the need for deterrence in prison, the court found the identical sentence for differently charged defendants risked legitimate grievance; accordingly the appeal was allowed in part by ordering one month to run concurrently to mark the difference between offences while leaving the custodial element intact.

Court Disposition

Appeal against sentence allowed in part; sentence adjusted to mark disparity between offences.

Orders

  • One month of the two-month sentence is to be served concurrently with any other sentences the appellant is serving; the remainder to run consecutively.