Hong Kong Judgment

Court of First Instance

R. v. CHOW CHOI WAH

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

Although the imposed concurrent sentences of 12 months for the offences were within the appropriate range, the court allowed the appeal on humanitarian grounds combined with the fact the appellant had already served the equivalent of seven months, concluding immediate release and repatriation properly balanced deterrence and clemency.

Court disposition

Appeal allowed; sentence set aside and substituted to enable immediate release and repatriation

Orders

  • Sentence of 12 months imprisonment set aside
  • Appellant to be released immediately and repatriated forthwith

02

Material facts

Parties

CHOW CHOI WAH

Appellant Counsel: Miss Christina Lee (D.L.A.)

THE QUEEN

Respondent Counsel: Mr W.D. Moultrie, S.C.C.

Amounts and remedies

  • Sentence Months: 12
  • Time Served Months: 7
  • Magistracy Appeal Number: 351

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Magistracy Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
Appellant submitted she was pregnant (expected delivery 24 Oct 1997), was unaware of pregnancy at sentencing, and that a reduced sentence would allow earlier repatriation to China on humanitarian grounds.
Respondent
Crown accepted the 12 month sentences were not wrong or excessive and relied on authorities holding pregnancy does not automatically justify reduction in sentence, citing R. Chan Lai Ha (Criminal Appeal 78/94).

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    R. Chan Lai Ha, Criminal Appeal 78/94

    Pregnancy of a defendant does not automatically justify reduction of sentence

  2. 02

    Supreme Court of Hong Kong, Magistracy Appeal No.351 of 1997 (Leong J.)

    Humanitarian clemency can justify immediate release and repatriation for a pregnant illegal immigrant where appropriate

  3. 03

    Common law sentencing principles as applied in this judgment

    Time served may satisfy the punitive and deterrent objectives of sentencing

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

Although the imposed concurrent sentences of 12 months for the offences were within the appropriate range, the court allowed the appeal on humanitarian grounds combined with the fact the appellant had already served the equivalent of seven months, concluding immediate release and repatriation properly balanced deterrence and clemency.

Obiter and limits

  • The sentences of 12 months were not regarded as wrong or excessive in principle
  • R. Chan Lai Ha was distinguished on its facts (serious fraud) and does not dictate refusal of clemency in all pregnancy cases

Court disposition

Appeal allowed; sentence set aside and substituted to enable immediate release and repatriation

  • Sentence of 12 months imprisonment set aside
  • Appellant to be released immediately and repatriated forthwith

Source and reliance status

Court of First Instance · 5 June 1997

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

Court of First Instance

Judgment· 5 June 1997

R. v. CHOW CHOI WAH

bjbj&

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG (Appellate Jurisdiction) MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO.351 OF 1997 --------------------

BETWEEN THE QUEEN Respondent and CHOW CHOI WAH Appellant -------------------- Coram : Hon Leong J. in Court Date of hearing : 5th June 1997 Date of judgment :5th June 1997 ----------------------

J U D G M E N T ---------------------- The appellant was convicted by her own plea of three offences : (a) possession of a forged Hong Kong Identity Card; (b) using a forged Hong Kong Identity Card and (c) remaining in Hong Kong without the authority of the Director of Immigration after having landed unlawfully in Hong Kong. She was sentenced to 12 months imprisonment for each conviction concurrent. She now appeals against sentence. The appellant is a pregnant woman. A medical report submitted on her behalf states that her expected date of delivery is 24th October 1997. Miss Lee, counsel for the appellant, submitted that at the time of sentence, the magistrate was not informed that she was pregnant because at the time the appellant herself was not aware of her pregnancy. The appellant would have served her sentence of 12 months and would be released on 6th October 1997. The appellant would be repatriated when she was near child birth. A reduction of her sentence would enable her to return earlier to China when it would be safe for her to do so. Miss Lee accepted that the sentences of 12 months for offences of the type the appellant was convicted were in no way wrong or excessive. However, she asked the court to consider the appeal from a humanitarian point of view. Mr Moultrie referred me to a number of cases on pregnancy of the defendant in relation to mitigation, especially

to R. Chan Lai Ha Criminal Appeal 78/94 where the Court of Appeal observed that the court did not regard the fact that the appellant there was pregnant as justifying any reduction in her sentence. It should be noted that the case of Chan Lai Ha was a case of serious fraud involving a not insubstantial sum. The present case is one of those illegal immigrant cases where as an act of clemency, it should serve all interests in Hong Kong for a pregnant illegal immigrant to be repatriated than be further detained here. The appellant has been in custody since February 1997 and by now has served the equivalent of seven months of her sentence. This period of custody would be sufficient as a deterrent for her and the chances of her returning would be reduced. In the circumstances, the appeal against sentence is allowed and the sentence of 12 months imprisonment is set aside and substituted by a term which will enable her to be released immediately and repatriated forthwith. (Arthur Leong) Judge of the High Court Mr W.D. Moultrie, S.C.C., for Crown/Respondent Miss Christina Lee (D.L.A.) assigned for Appellant -

PAGE - W[SO "@AB @Epson LQ-100 ESC/P 2 LPT1: ESCP2MS Epson LQ-100 ESC/P 2 Epson LQ-100 ESC/P 2

MSUD Epson LQ-100 ESC/P 2 Epson LQ-100 ESC/P 2

MSUD Epson LQ-100 ESC/P 2

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG Judiciary Normal Microsoft Word 8.0 Judiciary

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG Title _PID_GUID Microsoft Word MSWordDoc Word.Document.8

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

R. Chan Lai Ha, Criminal Appeal 78/94

Case cited

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.