Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Soliciting an advantage

Legal area

Court

25 Nov 2014

HKSAR v. LEUNG YAU WING, VICTOR

Citation

HKSAR v. LEUNG YAU WING, VICTOR
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC444/2013

Given the applicant's senior role, the significant breach of trust and the large sum (1.5% or about HK$6 million) solicited, the starting point of 4.5 years was justified; the judge properly rejected unparticularised mitigation that the scheme had no chance of success and was entitled to sentence accordingly; the guilty plea was not timely so the one‑third discount was generous but not overturned; therefore the sentence of 3 years and 1 month (consecutive one month) was appropriate and the appeal fails.
3 Jul 2000

CHAN CHAN CHEUNG v. HKSAR

Citation

CHAN CHAN CHEUNG v. HKSAR
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FAMC6/2000

No point of law of great and general importance was identified in the material and there was no suggestion of grave and substantial injustice arising from the convictions; accordingly leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal was refused.
13 Apr 2000

HKSAR v. WONG PUI SHAM

Citation

HKSAR v. WONG PUI SHAM
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC272/1999

The Court quashed convictions on counts 2 and 3 because material weaknesses (questionable provenance of ICAC notes, timing inconsistencies, and a plausible alternative source for the leak) left a lurking doubt as to safety of those convictions; the conviction on count 1 was upheld because it was independently supported by evidence and not tainted by those weaknesses.
19 Oct 1995

R. v. MOK WAI WO

Citation

R. v. MOK WAI WO
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA578/1995

Convictions were unsafe because the magistrate failed to address the admissibility and evidential weight of early complaints and the impact of discrepancies in supporting witness testimony on the complainant's credibility; accordingly the convictions were quashed but a retrial was ordered because the available evidence was sufficiently cogent to justify rehearing before another magistrate.
9 May 1995

ATTORNEY GENERAL v. BOW KI LUN and Another

Citation

ATTORNEY GENERAL v. BOW KI LUN and Another
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAAR4/1995

The Court allowed the Attorney General's application, holding that the trial judge had under-weighted the gravity of the corrupt conduct and wrongly accorded mitigating credit for cautioned statements later recanted; the Court set and applied clear starting points for sentencing (4 years for the 1st respondent reduced to 3 years; 2 years for the 2nd respondent on offering charges reduced to 20 months and 6 months on false accounting reduced to 4 months to be served consecutively, totaling 24 months) and directed variation of the sentences accordingly.
2 Jun 1989

THE QUEEN v. HO SIU FAI

Citation

THE QUEEN v. HO SIU FAI
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC133/1989

The Court held the trial judge's notional starting point was too high and, although the judge's one-third reduction for guilty pleas was generous, the overall concurrent sentences remained excessive; the Court quashed the original sentences and substituted concurrent sentences of two years and three months on each charge.
14 Aug 1985

THE QUEEN v. YEUNG KWOK-KUEN AND ANOTHER

Citation

THE QUEEN v. YEUNG KWOK-KUEN AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC78/1985

The Court upheld the convictions: there was sufficient evidence for a reasonable judge to convict; applying the 'lurking doubt' test the court was not left with any such doubt given the trial judge's credibility findings and assessment of evidence; a conspiracy to attempt to pervert the course of justice existed once there was agreement to persuade a witness not to give evidence and it was unnecessary that the amount to be paid be agreed.
18 May 1984

THE QUEEN v. CHAN SAU YAN

Citation

THE QUEEN v. CHAN SAU YAN
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA179/1984

The Magistrate's factual findings that Lai handed $500 to the appellant as an inducement for non‑action were supported by credible witness evidence and corroborated by ICAC officers' recovery of marked notes; the alternative explanation of payment for a gambling debt was not proved and thus the conviction for accepting an advantage was properly upheld.
25 Apr 1984

CHUNG PING CHEUNG JACK v. ATTORNEY GENERAL

Citation

CHUNG PING CHEUNG JACK v. ATTORNEY GENERAL
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA123/1984

The appellant's series of hints amounted to indirect solicitation under s2(2)(b) of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance and his cautioned statement constituted a complete confession corroborating the accomplice's evidence; accordingly the conviction was safe and the appeal was dismissed.
8 Nov 1983

THE QUEEN v. YUNG TAK-KEE

Citation

THE QUEEN v. YUNG TAK-KEE
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAAR14/1983

The magistrate erred in finding exceptional circumstances; under established authority an immediate custodial sentence is normally required for s.4 offences and the appropriate sentence on review is twelve months' immediate imprisonment on each charge, to run concurrently.