HKSAR v. SONG HSIAU HUA AND ANOTHER

HKSAR v. SONG HSIAU HUA AND ANOTHER

The magistrate did not err in principle in ordering the six-month sentences to run consecutively to existing sentences because both appellants committed the offences while on bail, demonstrating a disregard for the law; disparity in co-defendant treatment did not render the sentences improper and there was no basis to interfere.

Citation
HKSAR v. SONG HSIAU HUA AND ANOTHER
Parties
Respondent: HKSAR; 1st Appellant: Song Hsiau Hua; 2nd Appellant: Chan Yuk Ping
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
10 April 2003
Case Number
HCMA198/2003
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Sentence (magistracy Appeal) / Appellate Judgment on Sentence Appeal
Outcome
Appeals against sentence dismissed
Legal Topics
Managing a Vice Establishment, Consecutive Sentencing, Offences Committed on Bail
Source Language
EN
Criminal Law Sentencing Public Order/vice Regulation Managing a Vice Establishment Consecutive Sentencing Offences Committed on Bail

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HKSAR

Respondent

Song Hsiau Hua

1st Appellant

Chan Yuk Ping

2nd Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal Against Sentence (magistracy Appeal) / Appellate Judgment on Sentence Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the magistrate erred in ordering the sentence for the present offence to run consecutively to existing sentences
  2. 2 Whether disparity in treatment between co-offenders required interference with the sentence
  3. 3 Whether offences committed whilst on bail justify consecutive sentences

Ratio Decidendi

The magistrate did not err in principle in ordering the six-month sentences to run consecutively to existing sentences because both appellants committed the offences while on bail, demonstrating a disregard for the law; disparity in co-defendant treatment did not render the sentences improper and there was no basis to interfere.

Court Disposition

Appeals against sentence dismissed

Orders

  • Appeals dismissed
  • Sentences upheld: 1st appellant six months consecutive to existing five months (total 11 months)