Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Bill of rights article 12

Legal area

Court

5 Nov 2004

HKSAR v. YEUNG MOK YEH AND ANOTHER

Citation

HKSAR v. YEUNG MOK YEH AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2209/2004

For offenders convicted under age 18 who were detained at Her Majesty's pleasure, the court will exercise its power under s67C(4)(b) to quash indeterminate sentences and substitute appropriate fixed determinate terms; applying the offence gravity and mitigation the appropriate term for each respondent is 27 years imprisonment (30 years starting point reduced by 3 years for rehabilitation).
25 Jul 1997

HKSAR v. CHENG YAT MING

Citation

HKSAR v. CHENG YAT MING
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC592/1996

Given the applicant was 17 at the time of the offence, there was little premeditation, no weapon was brought, the incident was brief, and he had a clear record and no psychiatric disorder indicating future danger, the court exercised its power under Ordinance 86/97 (as applied pursuant to R v Lam Ka Yiu and supported by Article 12 of the Bill of Rights) to grant leave out of time, quash the life sentence and substitute a determinate sentence of 28 years' imprisonment.
22 Jun 1993

R. v. MOHAMMAD FAISAL

Citation

R. v. MOHAMMAD FAISAL
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC540/1992

The court held that the offence to which the applicant pleaded guilty under s.76 was one of simple possession and corresponds to s.100(2) of the Crimes (Amendment) Ordinance, which reduced the maximum penalty to three years; under Article 12 the applicant was entitled to the benefit of the lighter penalty and the concurrent sentences must be varied to effect immediate release.

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. YEUNG MOK YEH AND ANOTHER

HKSAR v. CHENG YAT MING

R. v. MOHAMMAD FAISAL