Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Youth sentencing (s109a)

  • 28 Sept 2018

    SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. WONG HO MING

    Citation
    [2018] HKCFA 43
    Court
    Court of Final Appeal
    Case number
    FACC4/2018

    The Court allowed the appeals: the magistrate had erred and s81A permitted review, but the Court of Appeal erred by applying the new Wong Chi Fung (CA) guidelines retrospectively when fixing lengths of imprisonment and failed to give proper effect to the conceptual protections for youth; accordingly the Court set aside the Court of Appeal sentences and substituted custodial sentences equal to the periods already served by each appellant.

  • 17 Jan 2018

    SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. CHOI TAT SHING

    Citation
    [2018] HKCFI 77
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCMP792/2015

    S109A of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance does not apply to these contempt proceedings because the Court of First Instance was not exercising criminal jurisdiction; sentencing must be tailored to each respondent’s role—immediate imprisonment for those who actively obstructed enforcement, suspended sentences and fines for lesser involvement—and costs awarded to the applicant on an indemnity basis with certificate for three counsel.

  • 17 Jan 2018

    SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. CHIU CHI SUM

    Citation
    [2018] HKCFI 77
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCMP783/2015

    S109A of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance does not apply because the Court of First Instance was not exercising its criminal jurisdiction in these contempt proceedings; sentencing was therefore governed by contempt sentencing principles: assess each respondent's role and conduct, impose immediate imprisonment for leading obstructive conduct (Wong Chi Fung 3 months; Wong Ho Ming 4 months 15 days) and suspended terms with fines for lesser/non-violent participants, with mitigation considered (age, role, financial hardship, cooperation).

  • 17 Jan 2018

    SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. KWAN SIU WANG

    Citation
    [2018] HKCFI 77
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCMP788/2015

    Section 109A of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance does not apply to these contempt proceedings because they are civil causes or matters in which the Court of First Instance is not exercising its criminal jurisdiction; sentencing must therefore be determined under civil-contempt principles with custody used where necessary to vindicate the court and protect public rights, with suspensions and fines applied according to culpability and mitigation.

  • 17 Jan 2018

    SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. WONG HO MING

    Citation
    [2018] HKCFI 77
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCMP798/2015

    S109A Criminal Procedure Ordinance does not apply to these contempt proceedings because the Court of First Instance was not exercising its criminal jurisdiction; accordingly the court was not bound by s109A when determining sentences. Sentencing must distinguish levels of culpability: leading obstructors received immediate imprisonment while lesser participants received suspended sentences with or without fines based on role and mitigation.

  • 17 Jan 2018

    SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. CHU PUI YAN

    Citation
    [2018] HKCFI 77
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCMP778/2015

    S109A does not apply because the statutory definition of 'court' confines s109A to the Court of First Instance when exercising criminal jurisdiction and the Court of Appeal has held these contempt proceedings are civil causes or matters; sentencing must therefore proceed under civil contempt principles with courts exercising discretion to impose immediate or suspended imprisonment and fines according to the defendant's role, conduct, age and mitigation, imposing immediate terms for leading obstructors and suspended terms or fines for lesser participants.