Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Hong Kong decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Court of Appeal granted leave to appeal against an 11-year sentence for attempted robbery and robbery, finding arguable issues on mitigation, starting points, and totality.
The Court of Appeal refused leave to appeal against sentence for two robbery applicants, holding the sentencing enhancements and separate driving sentences were justified.
The Court of First Instance dismissed a magistracy appeal against robbery conviction and sentence, upholding CCTV-based identification and a partly consecutive 21-month term.
The Court of Appeal refused leave to appeal against sentence for a planned armed robbery, holding that a 13-year starting point, enhanced for Form 8 status, was not manifestly excessive.
The sentencing judge correctly applied established authorities that taxi robberies warrant higher starting points, properly distinguished the applicant's leading and violent role from co‑defendants, and reasonably arrived at a six year sentence; the applicant's asserted mitigations did not justify reduction and the leave application is dismissed.
Source excerpt
The Court held the trial judge's 14-year benchmark for attempted rape was manifestly excessive on the facts; a 12-year starting point properly reflected the gravity given the aggravating features. Applying the admitted one-third guilty-plea reduction produced an 8-year term for count 2. The 3 years 4 months sentence for robbery (count 1) was appropriate but only 1 year of it should run concurrently with the 8-year term for count 2; the remainder and the short sentences for counts 3 and 4 should run consecutively, producing an aggregate sentence reduced from 12 years to 10 years 8 months.
Source excerpt
Leave to appeal against sentence is refused because the Court of Appeal found the sentencing judge's selection of starting points and application of discounts for timely pleas and assistance were appropriate given the serious, well‑planned conspiracy involving weapons and recruitment from the Mainland; the applicants failed to show any arguable case that the sentences were manifestly excessive.
Source excerpt
The Court held the trial judge's chosen starting points (9 years for principal participants; 10.5 years for organisers) were appropriate given the detailed planning, weaponry and high value of the target, and that the reductions for timely guilty pleas and assistance were properly and reasonably applied; the appellants failed to show the sentences were manifestly excessive, so leave to appeal was refused.
Source excerpt
The Court refused permission to appeal: the trial judge's detailed repetition and analysis of the forensic evidence, when read in full context, was a legitimate and balanced attempt to assist the jury and did not amount to advocacy for the prosecution or deny the applicant a fair trial; on sentence, the judge properly reduced the guilty-plea discount because the applicant absconded to the Mainland immediately after the offence, causing extra investigatory burden and delay, and the exercise of sentencing discretion was not interfered with by the Court of Appeal.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal refused leave to appeal sentence, holding that the 6-year term for robbery and indecent assault was not manifestly excessive.
Explore more
