Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Drug addiction treatment

Legal area

Court

22 Feb 2000

HKSAR v. LEUNG LAI KWAN

Citation

HKSAR v. LEUNG LAI KWAN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC597/1999

Given the applicant's age, the small quantities involved, the unavailability of other statutory disposals, the reports, the fact she had already spent a significant period in custody and came from a caring family, the Court concluded she had effectively served sufficient custodial time; it therefore quashed the Training Centre order and substituted a nine months imprisonment sentence to allow her imminent release.
1 Apr 1999

HKSAR v. FUNG CHI WING

Citation

HKSAR v. FUNG CHI WING
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA152/1999

The magistrate's 12 month starting point for the offence was appropriate and a one quarter reduction to 9 months was justified because the guilty plea was belated and the DATC report was unfavourable, therefore the appeal is dismissed.
1 Apr 1998

HKSAR v. LI LIK FUNG

Citation

HKSAR v. LI LIK FUNG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC765/1998

The Court upheld the District Court's exercise of discretion to detain the 20‑year‑old applicant in a training centre rather than impose immediate imprisonment because law requires consideration of alternatives for those under 21, DATC alone was insufficient punishment given the gravity of the attempted robbery, and public protection warranted the training centre order.
23 Apr 1997

R. v. CHOW KAM CHUEN

Citation

R. v. CHOW KAM CHUEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC603/1996

Sentences of imprisonment were quashed and substituted with an order that the applicant complete the Drug Addiction Treatment Centre course as a final chance because the DATC report suggested likely success and there were no compelling reasons to refuse completion of treatment.
23 Jul 1996

R. v. NGAN CHUN SANG

Citation

R. v. NGAN CHUN SANG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA625/1996

The magistrate was justified in substituting imprisonment for probation after breach, but a 9-month term was excessive given the trace quantity and personal consumption purpose; therefore the appropriate sentence in the circumstances is 6 months' imprisonment.
30 Jan 1996

ATTORNEY GENERAL v. SO CHI-SHING

Citation

ATTORNEY GENERAL v. SO CHI-SHING
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAAR13/1995

The Court held that, having regard to the respondent's demonstrated rehabilitation (satisfactory performance and discharge from the Drug Addiction Treatment Centre), remorse, positive probation and treatment reports and family support, those facts amounted to exceptional circumstances justifying a Training Centre order for the three robbery offences; accordingly the Attorney General's application to substitute a prison sentence was refused.
10 Feb 1995

R. v. LEE SIU LUNG

Citation

R. v. LEE SIU LUNG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC529/1994

The judge erred by indicating he accepted that some of the seized drugs were for a purpose other than personal consumption and sentencing on that basis; while latent risk may be considered, it cannot be used to effectively treat a simple possession case as trafficking, therefore the sentence on the first count was excessive and was reduced on appeal.
7 Sept 1989

THE QUEEN v. TONG CHUN CHUEN

Citation

THE QUEEN v. TONG CHUN CHUEN
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA664/1989

The magistrate erred by assuming the appellant would remain drug dependent after release without evidence; therefore the order requiring him to take a further driving test was unjustified and was quashed.
3 Aug 1989

THE QUEEN v. WONG TING

Citation

THE QUEEN v. WONG TING
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA859/1989

Appeal allowed and original 4 months imprisonment reduced to permit immediate release because, in light of the guilty plea, the appellant's age, medical condition, voluntary attendance at a methadone clinic, and time already spent in custody, further detention would serve no useful purpose despite the magistrate's concerns about diversion of methadone.
27 Mar 1987

THE QUEEN v. LEE YIU WAI AND ANOTHER

Citation

THE QUEEN v. LEE YIU WAI AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC614/1987

For the first applicant the established starting point for the quantity involved was 8 years; after allowing appropriate credit for guilty plea and assistance the 6 year custodial sentence was not excessive and the appeal was refused. For the second applicant, who was just over 16 and had been in custody for four months, the Court exercised its power to substitute detention in a Training Centre for the 6 year sentence, as custody should be a last resort for youthful offenders and withdrawal from addiction was likely to have occurred during remand.