9 Oct 1992
The court held that previous unlawful entry is a legitimate basis for upward adjustment of sentence despite the Attorney General's selective prosecution policy, and that use of another's identity card justifies an increased sentence where it was used to obtain particular benefits (applied to Chan but not to Tam); accordingly both appeals against sentence were dismissed.
21 Nov 1975
The magistrate relied on an erroneous assumption about the number of similar previous convictions which materially influenced the twelve month sentence; on that basis the sentence was set aside and substituted with a nine month term.
2 Jan 1975
The appellate court found the sentencing disparity unjustified because, although the co-accused received proper credit for a guilty plea, his numerous similar prior convictions reduced the appropriateness of greater leniency relative to the appellant, and the facts did not show the appellant to be more culpable; therefore the appellant's sentence was reduced to match his co-accused's sentence of two years' imprisonment.
9 Oct 1968
The court quashed the order for disqualification because the magistrate failed to exercise his discretion judicially by relying on prior offences for which the appellant had already been punished; disqualification must be imposed to protect the public and not to effect double punishment.