Hong Kong Case Law

22 Mar 2000

HKSAR v. LEE YUE HO

Citation

HKSAR v. LEE YUE HO

Court

Court of First Instance

Case number

HCMA719/1999

The Court held the magistrate did not err in principle or in fact: it was permissible to consider the inherent potential of the false valuation documents within the appellant's commercial transactions; the magistrate properly considered mitigation and suspension and legitimately concluded that only a custodial sentence was justified; the concurrent five‑month terms were not excessive.

• Possession of false instrument
• Suspended sentence
• Mitigation and antecedents
• Latent risk in sentencing

3 Jan 1980

CHAN KIM-MAN AND ANOTHER v. THE QUEEN

Citation

CHAN KIM-MAN AND ANOTHER v. THE QUEEN

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

CACC991/1979

The Court held that while it was not improper for the judge to consider an appropriate aggregate total, the total he fixed was excessive given the appellants' ages and records; the appeals were allowed and sentences substituted to reduce overall punishment accordingly.

• Totality principle
• Consecutive sentences
• Guilty plea mitigation
• Mitigation and antecedents

THE QUEEN v. CHAN HON KWUNG

Citation

THE QUEEN v. CHAN HON KWUNG

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

CACC218/1984

The sentencing judge either breached the principle against double punishment or adopted a manifestly excessive starting point; for possession of 35.31 grammes the appropriate sentence did not exceed three and a half years, so the appeal is allowed and the sentence is substituted at 3.5 years' imprisonment.

• Double punishment/double counting of antecedents
• Appropriate sentence for possession for trafficking
• Mitigation and antecedents