Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Drug addiction treatment centre order

Legal area

Court

19 Jan 2023

HKSAR v. CHOI KWOK FAI

Citation

[2023] HKCA 101
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC109/2022

The judge acted within lawful discretion in ordering detention in a DATC because the applicant was drug dependent, suitable for DATC treatment, and the order was made in his best interests and the public interest under Cap 244 s4; the prior period in custody did not render the DATC order impermissible; therefore the applicant's ground of appeal was not reasonably arguable and leave is refused.
12 Apr 2021

HKSAR v. BARBOSA NUNEZ CRISTIAN

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 1041
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA310/2020

The magistrate's factual findings that the DATC report and officers were truthful, combined with evidence of the appellant's positive urine test and long addiction and conviction history, justified a DATC order for rehabilitation; there was no demonstrable unfairness or legal error to render the sentence manifestly excessive, so the appeal must be dismissed.
11 Apr 2017

HKSAR v. KWOK KA-YEE, KAREN

Citation

HKSAR v. KWOK KA-YEE, KAREN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC341/2016

Given the appellant's documented drug dependency, prior history including prior DATC success, a DATC report recommending treatment, and statutory framework prioritising rehabilitation in appropriate cases, the judge rightly exercised discretion to impose a DATC order; the order was not manifestly excessive and the appeal is dismissed.
11 Nov 2013

SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. NG WING YI

Citation

SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. NG WING YI
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAAR4/2013

The Court held that a Drug Addiction Treatment Centre order was inappropriate for possession of approximately 200g of ketamine given the very high risk of dissemination and the need for deterrence; the original sentence was therefore manifestly inadequate and wrong in principle and should be set aside and substituted by a custodial sentence of two years' imprisonment (taking into account allowance for early plea, time already served and the distress of having sentence increased).
7 Mar 2011

HKSAR v. LEDESMA JOSE RIZALDO R

Citation

HKSAR v. LEDESMA JOSE RIZALDO R
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA5/2011

The DATC order was set aside because it was wrong in principle to order a rehabilitative DATC order to commence after an existing prison sentence; accordingly the court substituted a custodial sentence of 4 months and 20 days to run consecutively to the appellant's current imprisonment.
24 Feb 2003

HKSAR v. TANG SZE WOO

Citation

HKSAR v. TANG SZE WOO
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA41/2003

Given the confirmed drug dependence but extensive previous drug‑related convictions and the report's recommendation against a treatment order, the magistrate correctly adopted a 12‑month starting point reduced to 8 months for the guilty plea; the sentence was proportionate and not excessive, so the appeal against sentence is dismissed.
7 Jan 2003

HKSAR v. LAM MEE FAT

Citation

HKSAR v. LAM MEE FAT
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA1104/2002

The court upheld the convictions: the magistrate's credibility findings were reasonable and the evidence supported convictions for obstructing police, resisting a medical cavity search and possession of heroin; however, it was wrong in principle to impose a DATC order simultaneously with imprisonment, and accordingly the DATC order was set aside and replaced with an eight-month term of imprisonment to be served concurrently so that the total sentence remains eight months.
31 Dec 2002

HKSAR v. NG TIT HING

Citation

HKSAR v. NG TIT HING
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA1175/2002

The DATC order imposed by the magistrate was appropriate given the appellants addiction and offending history, and the claimed humanitarian grounds (death of son and wife's medical condition) did not meet the high threshold necessary to set aside the sentence; therefore the appeal is dismissed.
20 Dec 2000

HKSAR v. LIU YUK WAH

Citation

HKSAR v. LIU YUK WAH
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA1181/2000

The Magistrate properly exercised sentencing discretion by making a Drug Addiction Treatment Centre order based on the medical report indicating ongoing dependency, inconsistencies in the appellant's account, and a significant drug-related criminal history; the appellate court will not disturb that order.
17 Jun 1997

ATTORNEY GENERAL v. LAM KWOK HUNG

Citation

ATTORNEY GENERAL v. LAM KWOK HUNG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAAR6/1997

Given the total quantity (23.66 grams), the respondent's substantial criminal record and prior failed treatment, the DATC order was inappropriate; applying Lau Tak-ming produced a baseline of six years, reduced to four years for plea, with a further six-month credit leading to a custodial sentence of three years, and the appellate court quashed the DATC order and imposed that sentence.