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
Hong Kong Court of Appeal dealt with two criminal appeals on driving disqualification and sentence, dismissing Chow’s appeal and reducing Fung’s prison term and disqualification.
Appeal against a 15-month sentence for offending while subject to a removal order was dismissed; the court refused credit for 81 days of administrative detention.
The Court of Appeal refused leave to appeal out of time against a 10½-year drug trafficking sentence, holding the revised guidelines would not realistically lower it.
The appeal was dismissed because, on the correct factual chronology, the appellant committed offences during a relevant police bail period such that the trial judge lawfully ordered the sentences to run consecutively with the other money‑laundering sentence; any misstatement of chronology by defence counsel did not render the sentencing decision legally wrong or manifestly excessive.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal granted leave to appeal against sentence on grounds about the quantum of proceeds and manifest excessiveness, but refused leave on knowledge of predicate offence.
The High Court dismissed a sentence appeal for selling and possessing goods bearing forged trade marks, holding that six months’ imprisonment was not excessive.
Magistrate erred in treating the gross weight of mixed crystalline material as the weight of pure methamphetamine and failed to apply the Waqas principle. Considering the actual circumstances and precedents, a 7-month starting point was appropriate, uplifted by 2 months for recidivism and reduced by one-third for early plea, resulting in a 6-month custodial sentence.
Source excerpt
The Court held that s109 of the National Security (Legislative Provisions) Ordinance is clarificatory: it confirms that the penalty provisions of the National Security Law, including the minimum sentence in Article 21, apply to conspiracies, attempts and incitement. There is no legal gap; the applicant's arguments fail to raise an arguable case. The application for a certificate was therefore refused.
Source excerpt
The High Court, on full review of CCTV and oral evidence, accepted the complainant's account and found the appellant deliberately followed and deliberately hugged the complainant from behind in a confined elevator; the conduct and circumstances would be regarded as indecent by a sensible person; voluntary intoxication did not negate criminal responsibility for the basic‑intent indecent assault here; there was no reasonable doubt and the three‑week immediate custodial sentence was within proper sentencing discretion given aggravating factors, so conviction and sentence were upheld.
Source excerpt
The High Court, on rehearing, found no material error of law or fact that affected the sentence: even if the precise cancellation dates were misstated, the appellant knowingly drove without a valid licence and without third‑party insurance and the magistrate properly balanced seriousness and mitigation; the fresh evidence application was refused as it could have been produced at trial and would not have altered sentence; therefore the suspended custodial sentence and fines were not manifestly excessive and the appeal was dismissed.
Source excerpt
Explore more
