Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Statutory charging choice

  • 31 Jan 1989

    THE QUEEN v. SIU KAM LAM

    Citation
    THE QUEEN v. SIU KAM LAM
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCMA54/1989

    For hawking obstruction offences in the Tsimshatsui "Golden Mile" a consistent sentencing approach is required: first offenders should generally be fined no more than $600, repeat offenders may be fined up to $1,000 (and higher for persistent recidivists), with allowance for mitigation such as honest disclosure; charging should be consistently under the Hawkers By-laws rather than the Summary Offences Ordinance to avoid artificially higher penalties.

  • 31 Jan 1989

    THE QUEEN v. AU WAI

    Citation
    THE QUEEN v. AU WAI
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCMA35/1989

    For hawking obstruction offences in the Tsimshatsui 'Golden Mile' area a policy of deterrence is permissible, but as a matter of appellate principle first offenders should not be fined more than $600; voluntary disclosure of prior offences can attract a lesser reduction to $800; repeat offenders may lawfully attract fines of $1,000 or higher depending on recalcitrance; charging should be consistent and not use higher‑penalty statutes merely to increase fines.