8 Feb 2005
The sentences imposed (4 months for the first offence and 8 months for the second, ordered to run consecutively to total 12 months) were within proper sentencing principles and not manifestly excessive because the second offence was committed while on bail and the starting points used conformed with established guideline authority (HKSAR v. Mok Cho Tik).
8 Feb 2005
The appellate court held that the magistrate's starting points fell within the established Mok Cho Tik guideline, properly treated the second offence committed while on bail as an aggravating factor, and that the resulting sentences, both individually (4 months and 8 months) and cumulatively (12 months consecutive), were not wrong in principle or manifestly excessive; the appeal was dismissed.
7 Feb 2001
The Court held that the correct starting point for this case was 18 months' imprisonment for simple possession of 15.724 grammes of methamphetamine, that a 12‑month enhancement for a significant latent risk was justified, producing 30 months before mitigation, and that having regard to mitigation the appropriate substituted sentence is two years' imprisonment; the trial judge's starting point of two years before enhancement (resulting in three years) was excessive and set aside.