Z v. HKSAR
- Citation
- Z v. HKSAR
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Hong Kong
- Court
- Court of Final Appeal
- Decision
- 26 October 2006
- Posture
- Miscellaneous Proceedings (criminal) on Application for Leave to Appeal From CACC No. 506 of 2004 / Determination on Application for Leave to Appeal
- Case number
- FAMC22/2006
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- Court of Final Appeal
- Decision
- 26 October 2006
- Posture
- Miscellaneous Proceedings (criminal) on Application for Leave to Appeal From CACC No. 506 of 2004 / Determination on Application for Leave to Appeal
- Case number
- FAMC22/2006
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The Court of Final Appeal granted leave to appeal and certified as a point of great and general importance the question whether useful information provided before arrest must be taken into account in mitigation of sentence; the court did not decide the substantive issue on the merits.
Court disposition
Leave to appeal granted
Orders
- Leave to appeal granted to the Court of Final Appeal on the certified point of law concerning mitigation for pre-arrest assistance
02
Material facts
Parties
Z
Applicant Counsel: Mr Robert Y H Pang; Ms Cancy S S Liu (assigned by the Hong Kong Bar Association Free Legal Service Scheme)HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
Respondent Counsel: Mr Cheung Wai-sun; Mr Robert Lee (of the Department of Justice)03
Procedural history
Posture
Miscellaneous Proceedings (criminal) on Application for Leave to Appeal From CACC No. 506 of 2004 / Determination on Application for Leave to Appeal
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether useful information provided to law enforcement before arrest can be taken into account in mitigation of sentence
- 02
Whether the Court of Appeal was correct to limit mitigation credit to information provided after arrest
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicant contends that useful information given to a law enforcement agency before arrest should be taken into account in mitigation of sentence.
- Respondent
- The respondent (and the Court of Appeal) contends that mitigation for assistance is applicable only where the information was provided after arrest, and opposed extending that mitigation to pre-arrest disclosures.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Common law
Assistance to law enforcement is a factor in mitigation of sentence.
- 02
Court of Appeal (CACC No. 506 of 2004)
The timing of assistance (pre-arrest versus post-arrest) may affect the availability or weight of mitigation credit.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The Court of Final Appeal granted leave to appeal and certified as a point of great and general importance the question whether useful information provided before arrest must be taken into account in mitigation of sentence; the court did not decide the substantive issue on the merits.
Obiter and limits
- The point was certified as one of great and general importance and the court confined the determination to granting leave rather than resolving the substantive legal question.
Court disposition
Leave to appeal granted
- Leave to appeal granted to the Court of Final Appeal on the certified point of law concerning mitigation for pre-arrest assistance
Source and reliance status
Court of Final Appeal · 26 October 2006
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.
Court of Final Appeal
Judgment· 26 October 2006
bjbj FAMC No. 22 of 2006
IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 22 OF 2006 (CRIMINAL) (ON APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL FROM CACC NO. 506 OF 2004) ___ Between Z Applicant - and -
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION Respondent ___ Appeal Committee : Mr Justice Chan Acting CJ, Mr Justice Bokhary PJ and Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ Date of Hearing : 26 October 2006 Date of Determination : 26 October 2006 _____
D E T E R M I N A T I O N _____ Mr Justice Chan Acting CJ: The point of law which the applicant wishes to pursue in the Court of Final Appeal is that useful information provided by a defendant to a law enforcement agency is to be taken into account in mitigation of sentence even if such information was provided before his arrest (and not only, as the Court of Appeal held, if it was provided after his arrest). We certify the point is one of great and general importance involved in the decision of the Court of Appeal from which the applicant seeks leave to appeal against sentence to the Court of Final Appeal, and we grant such leave. (Patrick Chan) Acting Chief Justice (Kemal Bokhary) Permanent Judge (R A V Ribeiro) Permanent Judge Mr Robert Y H Pang and Ms Cancy S S Liu (assigned by the Hong Kong Bar Association Free Legal Service Scheme) for the Applicant Mr Cheung Wai-sun and Mr Robert Lee (of the Department of Justice) for the Respondent -
PAGE - heB. heB. FAMC No.dot setup Microsoft Word 9.0 Title Microsoft Word Document MSWordDoc Word.Document.8
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.