Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Appellate interference with sentence

Legal area

Court

28 Jun 2002

HKSAR v. WU PAK CHEUNG

Citation

HKSAR v. WU PAK CHEUNG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA261/2002

The court held that the sentencing magistrate was entitled to refuse mitigation for evidentiary agreement but, applying Choi Lok and subsequent authority, the appellant's culpability given his role and possession of about 1,400 infringing discs warranted a reduced sentence; the 18 months term was excessive and was substituted with 15 months imprisonment to reflect consistency with precedent and the lesser quantity involved.
2 Feb 1996

R. v. TAM MAN KWONG

Citation

R. v. TAM MAN KWONG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA1217/1995

The six‑month sentence was excessive because the assault was in effect minor and the evidence did not support a real risk of serious injury; the magistrate erred in imposing sentence primarily to address the appellant's drug addiction rather than the nature of the offence; the appellate court allowed the appeal and ordered immediate release.
18 Jun 1980

YIP CHUN WAH v. THE QUEEN

Citation

YIP CHUN WAH v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC425/1980

The appellate court removed the three month driving disqualification because it accepted that the appellant had been told by his insurer that a conviction would foreclose insurance assistance, and that the magistrate had relied on the appellant's failure to admit guilt in imposing disqualification; since that information would likely have affected the magistrate's decision, the disqualification was set aside while the fine was upheld.

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. WU PAK CHEUNG

R. v. TAM MAN KWONG

YIP CHUN WAH v. THE QUEEN