Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Dutiable commodities ordinance

Legal area

Court

9 Sept 2009

HKSAR v. WAN CHI KAU

Citation

HKSAR v. WAN CHI KAU
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA234/2009

The sentence of 15 months imprisonment was appropriate and not excessive given the large quantity of cigarettes (164,200), the appellant's status as a recidivist with 11 prior similar convictions, and the proper application of the totality principle; the magistrate permissibly considered the subsequent offending while on bail only in fixing totality and concurrency; appeal dismissed.
5 Aug 2003

HKSAR v. SINGH BALRAJ

Citation

HKSAR v. SINGH BALRAJ
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA1151/2002

The application for a certificate was refused because the court found no proper basis that any arguable point of law of great and general importance was involved; procedural delay was noted but not dispositive.
28 Feb 2003

HKSAR v. BALRAJ SINGH

Citation

HKSAR v. BALRAJ SINGH
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA1151/2002

Where a magistrate who has seen and heard witnesses prefers the prosecution evidence and is entitled to form an impression of credibility, the appellate court will not disturb the conviction absent demonstrable insufficiency of reasons or that the verdict was unsafe; on these facts the magistrate was entitled to find guilt and the appeal must be dismissed.
30 Oct 2002

HKSAR v. CHUNG SHUI TAI

Citation

HKSAR v. CHUNG SHUI TAI
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA1278/2001

The appeal was allowed because the court found the solicitor's advice regarding whether the appellant should give evidence was of such quality that it affected the fairness of the trial, rendering the conviction unsafe and requiring the conviction to be set aside and the matter remitted for a trial de novo.
10 Dec 1998

HKSAR v. CHENG TIN SUNG

Citation

HKSAR v. CHENG TIN SUNG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA1042/1998

Appeal allowed because the 12‑month immediate custodial sentence was disproportionate in light of comparative sentencing data for similar quantities of light diesel and the appellant's mitigating personal circumstances and good character; the sentence was reduced so as to permit the appellant's immediate release.
30 Jun 1998

HKSAR v. TSANG HEUNG CHUNG

Citation

HKSAR v. TSANG HEUNG CHUNG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA291/1998

The appeal was allowed in part: the Court found the learned Magistrate had given undue weight to unproven triad involvement and improperly discounted the appellant's clear record due to non‑residency; having regard to the quantity of cargo, role as Master, and the guilty plea discount, the appropriate sentence on the first charge is seven months imprisonment.

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. WAN CHI KAU

HKSAR v. SINGH BALRAJ

HKSAR v. BALRAJ SINGH

HKSAR v. CHUNG SHUI TAI

HKSAR v. CHENG TIN SUNG

HKSAR v. TSANG HEUNG CHUNG