Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Mitigation and rehabilitation

Legal area

Court

24 Oct 2003

WONG SAU LAI v. CATHAY PACIFIC AIRWAYS LTD

Citation

WONG SAU LAI v. CATHAY PACIFIC AIRWAYS LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI111/2002

The defendant breached its duty by providing equipment (the blue drawer/bar cart configuration) that presented a reasonably foreseeable risk; causation supported partial liability. The plaintiff was found to have materially contributed to the accident by excessive pulling or improper support; liability apportioned 50:50. Employees' compensation findings were treated as binding for relevant factual and quantum determinations. Net judgment of HKD 787,100 awarded to the plaintiff with interest and costs nisi as ordered.
21 Dec 2001

HKSAR v. CHAN HONG

Citation

HKSAR v. CHAN HONG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA1255/2001

Given the spontaneous nature of the offence, absence of injury, the weapon being a tool at hand, and the appellant's 17 years of demonstrated reformation, the magistrate's immediate custodial sentence was excessive in the circumstances and should be suspended; the court substituted a suspended sentence of the same length for 18 months suspension period.
21 May 1992

THE QUEEN v. CHEUK FUNG PING

Citation

THE QUEEN v. CHEUK FUNG PING
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC423/1991

Given the accepted facts of assault on the victim and attempted forced entry into the bedroom, the offence was aggravated and the sentence of 3.5 years was not excessive; the appellant gave no sufficient reason for delay to justify granting leave out of time, so the application was refused.
9 Mar 1989

ATTORNEY GENERAL v. FONG MING YUEN

Citation

ATTORNEY GENERAL v. FONG MING YUEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAAR18/1988

Although the sentence (a Training Centre Order of up to three years) was lenient, the Court was not satisfied it was manifestly inadequate or the trial judge had erred in principle; the trial judge validly weighed rehabilitation and youth against aggravating features and his discretionary choice did not warrant interference.
5 May 1975

CHAN KWOK FAI v. THE QUEEN

Citation

CHAN KWOK FAI v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC82/1975

The appellate court held that, although the offence was serious, the appellant's favourable report from the Commissioner of Prisons and the Commissioner’s willingness to receive him at a training centre justified substituting commitment to a training centre for the two-year prison sentence; the appeal was allowed and the order altered accordingly.
4 Mar 1974

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL v. LAU KAM-TIM

Citation

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL v. LAU KAM-TIM
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAAR5/1974

Detention in an addiction treatment centre may be lawful but is only justifiable in rare cases where there is no violence, no weapon, no accomplice and a demonstrated genuine desire for treatment; where those conditions are absent and public protection and deterrence demand it, a custodial sentence must be imposed — accordingly the trial orders for treatment were inappropriate in these cases and substituted by 18 months' imprisonment with time spent in treatment centres credited.

Hong Kong Case Law

WONG SAU LAI v. CATHAY PACIFIC AIRWAYS LTD

HKSAR v. CHAN HONG

THE QUEEN v. CHEUK FUNG PING

ATTORNEY GENERAL v. FONG MING YUEN

CHAN KWOK FAI v. THE QUEEN

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL v. LAU KAM-TIM