Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Parity in sentencing

Legal area

Court

7 Mar 2025

香港特別行政區訴張賀祺

Citation

[2025] HKCA 245
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC4/2023

The Court held the sentencing judge had properly considered youth and permissibly limited the youth discount to particular co-defendants; however, on an assessment of relative culpability the appellant's possession of a surgical mask and a glove was less culpable than items held by some co-defendants and warranted a modest reduction in sentence. The appeal was therefore allowed in part and the custodial term reduced from 5 years to 4 years 9 months.
5 May 2022

香港特別行政區訴姚玲照

Citation

[2022] HKCA 657
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC138/2021

The sentencing judge's selection of a 24‑month starting point was justified by the large scale and seriousness of the counterfeit operation; appropriate discounts (2 months for trial delay and 1 month for pregnancy) were applied; there was no error in principle or manifest excess warranting appellate interference, therefore leave to appeal against sentence is refused.
27 Dec 2018

LOU TIT MAN v. SECRETARY OF JUSTICE

Citation

[2018] HKCA 1004
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV539/2018

The sentence of 4 months imprisonment was anomalous and disproportionate when compared with sentences in the series of related 'minibus' contempt cases; the judge erred in treating the appellant as effectively an organiser like Cheng based on the elevated platform evidence, and parity required reduction, so the appeal was allowed and the custodial sentence quashed and substituted to permit immediate release.
30 Nov 2018

HKSAR v. SO PING CHI

Citation

[2018] HKCA 913
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC186/2016

Evidence established that the appellant deliberately issued and failed to rescind a blanket non‑enforcement instruction substituting his own decision for legislative requirements; this was wilful nonfeasance without reasonable excuse and sufficiently serious to warrant criminal conviction; sentence was excessive when parity and mitigation are considered and was reduced to time served (immediate release).
29 Apr 2009

HKSAR v. NYIRENDA VINCENT CHIOMBA

Citation

HKSAR v. NYIRENDA VINCENT CHIOMBA
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC221/2008

The applicant's unequivocal guilty plea and admitted acceptance that he believed the suitcase contained heroin preclude changing the plea; his post‑arrest cooperation produced no tangible result and therefore did not merit the significant discount given to D1; the one‑third discount for a timely plea was appropriate; health and family matters did not justify reduction. Accordingly the application to alter sentence/leave to appeal is dismissed and the sentence is affirmed.
11 Jan 2006

HKSAR v. CHAN YING KIT

Citation

HKSAR v. CHAN YING KIT
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC163/2005

Because the applicant's circumstances were not distinguishable from those of co-accused Po Chi-man whose sentence was reduced on appeal, the Court granted leave to appeal out of time and reduced the applicant's sentence to 2 years.
16 Nov 2005

HKSAR v. OOPS LTD

Citation

HKSAR v. OOPS LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA931/2005

The Court held that although the offences were serious because of the potential for injury and supply interruption, the fines imposed by the Magistrate were plainly excessive and out of line with comparable sentences; accordingly the appeal was allowed in part and the fines were reduced to achieve proportionality and parity.
2 May 2002

HKSAR v. CHAN KAM PO

Citation

HKSAR v. CHAN KAM PO
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC220/2001

Despite an almost five-month delay and unimpressive reasons, the court exercised its discretion to extend time because the applicant's appeal would inevitably succeed by parity with co-defendants whose sentences were reduced; accordingly leave to appeal out of time was granted and the applicant's sentences reduced to align with those co-defendants.
9 Nov 1999

HKSAR v. WONG KAI HING

Citation

HKSAR v. WONG KAI HING
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC316/1999

The court dismissed the application for leave to appeal against sentence: the sentence of 27 months' imprisonment (concurrent on two counts) was not excessive given the seriousness of the offence, the applicant's active and equal participation in a violent blackmail involving captivity, threats and a firearm, and the trial judge's legitimate decision to achieve parity with the co-defendant; absence of a Social Enquiry Report and the applicant's personal circumstances did not render the sentence unsafe. The court nevertheless ordered that four months of time spent in custody shall not count to…
22 Oct 1975

HO CHEUK FAN v. THE QUEEN

Citation

HO CHEUK FAN v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC635/1975

Although both trial judges were entitled to conclude the appellant was a substantial contributor to the conspiracy, it was unjust that the re-trial should result in a heavier sentence than that imposed at the first trial; accordingly the appeal is allowed and the sentence reduced to the original six years' imprisonment.