24 Jun 1997
The sentencing judge erred in principle by failing to give any credit for the assistance offered by the applicant; although the aggregate six-year sentence was not manifestly excessive, the proper remedy was to reduce the total sentence by six months to reflect that assistance.
16 Feb 1988
The Court upheld the sentencing approach that the offences were aggravated and the guilty plea merited only modest discount, but held that the applicant's post‑sentence cooperation, though not 'super grass' level, warranted a two‑year reduction of the concurrent sentences from nine to seven years.
18 Oct 1978
The Court held that the five‑year concurrent sentence was appropriate for the first appellant and refused to interfere; but the five‑year sentence imposed on the second appellant, who was 17 with no previous convictions and mitigating circumstances, was manifestly excessive and was quashed and substituted with an order of detention in a training centre under the Training Centres Ordinance.