18 Jan 2002
The appeal was dismissed because the Magistrate's low fine of HK$25,000 was a fair exercise of discretion given the facts and mitigation; the additional prospective appointment and listing matters were irrelevant and would not justify interference; absent manifest excess or error in principle the court will not alter sentence.
11 Jan 2002
The court held the magistrate's fine of $20,000 was excessive relative to the $4,400 received; a fine set at a premium of between two and three times the amount received (resulting in $9,500) properly balanced deterrence and mitigation and thus the sentence should be reduced to $9,500.
11 Jan 2002
The original fine was disproportionate as it amounted to nearly five times the fees received; a fine set at a premium of between two and three times the benefit properly balances deterrence and mitigation. Accordingly the imposed fine of $20,000 was excessive and was reduced to $9,500.