Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Endangering safety at sea

Legal area

Court

6 Jun 2018

HKSAR v. SULEMAN MUHAMMAD

Citation

[2018] HKCA 324
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC113/2017

Appellant was properly treated as akin to a crew member who voluntarily assumed the coxswain role shortly before interception; accordingly the appropriate starting point is that of a crew member (4 years) and aggravating features related to prior arrangements and vessel deficiencies that he could not have known should not have enhanced the sentence; therefore reduce sentence on Charge 1 to 4 years and leave Charge 2 concurrent.
30 May 2018

香港特別行政區訴羅堪就

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 1172
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA401/2016

The trial judge properly accepted the uncontradicted expert and police evidence that the ship's doors and escape routes were rendered effectively unusable to outside rescuers, thereby endangering persons aboard; the Director of Marine's written direction was lawfully made on reasonable safety grounds and met necessity and proportionality tests; claimed motives or protest purposes did not negate criminal liability or render the administrative restriction unconstitutional. Accordingly convictions and sentence were upheld.
8 Dec 2017

HKSAR v. SULEMAN MUHAMMAD

Citation

HKSAR v. SULEMAN MUHAMMAD
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC113/2017

The judge's findings that the occupants were unauthorized entrants and that the applicant's unsworn interview account was inherently implausible were reasonably open on the evidence, so leave to appeal conviction was refused; however, there was a reasonably arguable ground that the sentencing judge erred in applying a five year starting point (appropriate for captains/persons in charge) and in enhancing it for absence of safety equipment where the applicant appeared to be a crew member simpliciter, so leave to appeal sentence was granted and legal aid provided.
13 Oct 2016

HKSAR v. WAN RUZHONG

Citation

HKSAR v. WAN RUZHONG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC128/2016

The court dismissed the application for leave to appeal because there was no reasonable prospect of demonstrating that the total sentence of 40 months was manifestly excessive; although enhancing the immigration sentence for lack of safety equipment while also convicting on section 72 raises a real risk of double punishment, the totality was not excessive and the preferable sentencing practice is to punish the section 72 conduct separately rather than enhance the immigration starting point.
8 Jul 2016

HKSAR v. CHOW CHI WAI

Citation

HKSAR v. CHOW CHI WAI
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FAMC18/2016

Leave to appeal was refused because the proposed questions did not arise from the judge's ruling and because the statutory discretion under s6 Cap 492 is fact‑specific: substantial overlap of evidence and a related conviction can legitimately be treated as a material reason to refuse costs on partial acquittal, and no new principle required the Court's intervention.
2 Feb 2016

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION v. CHOW CHI WAI AND ANOTHER

Citation

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION v. CHOW CHI WAI AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCC458/2013

Application refused because the evidence relevant to the acquitted manslaughter counts would, on the facts, have had to be led in any event for the offence on which the defendant was convicted and the prosecution's conduct did not unnecessarily increase defence costs to a degree warranting an award.
12 Nov 2015

HKSAR v. LAI SAI MING

Citation

HKSAR v. LAI SAI MING
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC77/2015

The Court held the sentencing judge did not err in principle and the overall sentence of 8 years imprisonment was neither manifestly excessive nor wrong in principle given the applicant’s gross negligence, that negligence being a substantial cause of 39 deaths which were a foreseeable aggravating consequence; omission to expressly address deterrence did not vitiate the sentence.
17 Oct 2014

HKSAR v. DING QIJING

Citation

HKSAR v. DING QIJING
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC75/2014

The judge erred in treating the criminality under s39 as if it were s37 and applying the higher customary s37 starting point; having regard to the statutory distinction, the Court of Appeal set an appropriate starting point of 4½ years for the s39 offence, allowed a 3-month uplift for absent safety equipment, applied a one-third guilty plea discount, and resentenced the applicant to 38 months on Charge 1, with the previously ordered two months consecutive on Charge 3 left intact resulting in a total of 40 months imprisonment.
14 Dec 2010

HKSAR v. TANG ZHUYAN

Citation

HKSAR v. TANG ZHUYAN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC223/2010

The Court held that the sampan was not proved to be unseaworthy in the aggravated sense used in precedent, therefore the appropriate starting point for Charge 1 under s37D(1) was 5 years; the appropriate starting point for Charge 2 (endangering safety at sea) was 12 months given absence of specified aggravating features; applying a one-third discount for guilty pleas and the totality principle (with two months of Charge 2 consecutive) the sentences imposed by the judge were excessive and substituted sentences of 3 years 4 months (Charge 1) and 8 months (Charge 2, 2 months consecutive) totalli…
5 Nov 2010

HKSAR v. ZHONG MING JING

Citation

HKSAR v. ZHONG MING JING
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC180/2010

The Court held that the appropriate starting point for Charge 1 is five years (not six); absence of life‑saving and fire‑fighting equipment are aggravating factors to be recognised henceforth; the judge was entitled to starting points of 18 months for Charge 2 and three months for Charge 3; the sentencing order that Charges 2 and 3 run concurrently with each other but consecutively to Charge 1 was appropriate; applying a one‑third discount for plea, Charge 1 is reduced to three years and four months producing a total effective sentence of four years and four months.