Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Sentencing ranges

Legal area

Court

21 Aug 2020

TONG YING KIT v. HKSAR

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 2133
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1601/2020

The habeas corpus application is dismissed because the Applicant's detention was pursuant to a lawful magistrate remand order and the proper remedy for challenging refusal of bail is a statutory review under s9J CPO; Article 42(2) is not an absolute "no bail" provision when properly construed with s9G CPO and fundamental rights; Articles 20,21,24 and Article 44 are not shown to be unconstitutional on the facts and law before the court.
22 Feb 2000

HKSAR v. CHIU YUK YIN JACKIE

Citation

HKSAR v. CHIU YUK YIN JACKIE
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC607/1999

Leave to appeal out of time was refused because the stated reason for delay (fear of deportation after being informed by an immigration officer) was not a valid basis to extend time and, on the merits, the sentences were merciful, within the applicable sentencing band and not manifestly excessive, so the appeal had no realistic prospect of success.
24 Jan 1986

ATTORNEY GENERAL v. CHEUNG YUI-MAN

Citation

ATTORNEY GENERAL v. CHEUNG YUI-MAN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAAR16/1985

Applying the totality principle to a series of eight burglaries and one attempted burglary involving high value thefts over eight months, the Court held that individual sentences should be calibrated so the overall punishment is just; the correct exercise was to impose concurrent custodial terms of five years for each burglary (reflecting appropriate gravity and a one year discount relative to an assessed six year level) while leaving the three year sentence for attempted burglary undisturbed.

Hong Kong Case Law

TONG YING KIT v. HKSAR

HKSAR v. CHIU YUK YIN JACKIE

ATTORNEY GENERAL v. CHEUNG YUI-MAN