Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Fines and penalties

Legal area

Court

20 May 2006

COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE v. CHU FUNG CHEE

Citation

COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE v. CHU FUNG CHEE
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCIA10/2005

The court held the Tribunal costs were not deductible: they were not incurred for the production of profits but related to disciplinary matters remote from the profit‑earning process, they were akin to fines/penalties recoverable under s.37 Cap.159 (with public revenue as secondary under s.39) and, on the facts, were capital in nature as payments to preserve the taxpayer's professional practice; the Board erred in law and its decision is annulled.
15 Oct 1996

R. v. KI CHOR ON

Citation

R. v. KI CHOR ON
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA839/1996

The court held that the total fine of HK$425,000 was excessive given the appellant's means, age and the scale of his business; the correct sentencing approach uses Schedule 8 guidelines and requires fines proportionate to the offender's ability to pay and the need for deterrence, and therefore substituted a total fine of HK$95,000 (individual adjustments specified).
15 Oct 1996

R. v. KI CHOR ON

Citation

R. v. KI CHOR ON
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA843/1996

Schedule 8 of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance, together with sentencing principles of proportionality, deterrence and the offender's inability to pay, required reduction of the aggregate fine; the magistrate's total of $425,000 was excessive given appellant's means and the nature of the offences and is substituted by a total fine of $95,000 with specified per-summons amounts.
18 May 1988

THE QUEEN v. CHENG NGAN CHEE

Citation

THE QUEEN v. CHENG NGAN CHEE
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA293/1988

Apply the established 40% guideline to the value of the undeclared goods (HK$4,200), yielding HK$1,600; the facts and size of the operation did not warrant a higher penalty and the reduced fine still results in a loss on the transaction, so the original fine was excessive and must be reduced to HK$1,600.
5 Mar 1987

THE QUEEN v. MA LAI WU AND OTHERS

Citation

THE QUEEN v. MA LAI WU AND OTHERS
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAAR23/1986

The Court held the original sentences were manifestly inadequate for deliberate tax evasion; while immediate custodial sentences are the appropriate norm for such offences, because this is a review and the District Court tariff previously avoided immediate custody the suspensions were left intact; fines imposed beyond jurisdiction were reduced to jurisdictional maximums; a 200% penalty on certain charges was imposed totaling HKD 865,412 to be paid one-third by each defendant; the Application for Review was granted.

Hong Kong Case Law

COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE v. CHU FUNG CHEE

R. v. KI CHOR ON

R. v. KI CHOR ON

THE QUEEN v. CHENG NGAN CHEE

THE QUEEN v. MA LAI WU AND OTHERS