Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Abuse of trust

Legal area

Court

19 Mar 2008

HKSAR v. ALVAREZ JUVIE AGBAYANI

Citation

HKSAR v. ALVAREZ JUVIE AGBAYANI
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC114/2007

The Court dismissed leave to appeal conviction because the trial judge gave adequate, proportionate reasons and properly assessed Hobson's credibility in light of corroborative evidence, but granted leave on sentence because the trial judge lacked jurisdiction to alter the sentence after being functus officio and the Court resentenced the applicant, substituting specific concurrent and consecutive terms to preserve an aggregate of 32 months imprisonment.
9 Jul 1998

HKSAR v. CHAN KA SHING

Citation

HKSAR v. CHAN KA SHING
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC166/1998

The Court found no error in sentence: the sentencing judge considered relevant factors including family background and the probation report; given multiple offences and abuse of trust, the aggregate sentence of 2.5 years (after more than one third discount from a 4 year starting point) was not excessive; the application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
17 Mar 1998

HKSAR v. FOK CHIU MING

Citation

HKSAR v. FOK CHIU MING
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC414/1997

The starting point of seven years for the aggregate offending was appropriate given the large loss and abuse of trust, but the judge failed to apply the full one-third guilty plea discount; the Court of Appeal reduced the aggregate sentence to 4 years 8 months by applying the appropriate discount.
12 Oct 1994

FUNG SHUI KUEN v. R.

Citation

FUNG SHUI KUEN v. R.
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC437/1994

The trial judge properly identified a three-year starting point and reduced it to 18 months after considering mitigation; the Court accepted availability of necessary medical care but, solely on humanitarian grounds given the applicant's serious illness, reduced the sentence further to 12 months; the offence was premeditated and an abuse of trust and the sentence should not be suspended.
26 Aug 1993

ATTORNEY GENERAL v. HO YU PING

Citation

ATTORNEY GENERAL v. HO YU PING
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAAR8/1993

Court held the trial sentences were manifestly inadequate in principle (starting point should have been 18 months with a one‑third discount for guilty pleas) and that concurrency was wrong in principle for distinct offences aggravated by breach of trust; notwithstanding that, the Court exercised discretion not to increase the sentences because the respondent had already served a substantial part, was undergoing treatment and rehabilitation, and the public interest did not require escalation — accordingly the Court made no order on the review.
3 Jul 1990

THE QUEEN v. CHAN SUM HO

Citation

THE QUEEN v. CHAN SUM HO
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC536/1989

The Court refused leave to appeal and upheld consecutive sentences totalling 30 months because the offences constituted a serious abuse of trust by a prison instructor; the sentences were not manifestly excessive, reliance on the broader evidence as context was not a reversible error, and the probation report and financial loss did not materially alter the sentencing outcome.
13 Aug 1976

FUNG MAN WAI @ SAI WAI AND ANOTHER v. THE QUEEN

Citation

FUNG MAN WAI @ SAI WAI AND ANOTHER v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC333/1976

The court affirmed that the first appellant's breach of trust justified the imposed four-year sentences and refused to interfere, but held that the second appellant's participation was minimal so the 18-month concurrent sentences were manifestly excessive and were reduced to three months to run concurrently and consecutive to the sentence he was already serving; the second appellant's convictions were upheld.

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. ALVAREZ JUVIE AGBAYANI

HKSAR v. CHAN KA SHING

HKSAR v. FOK CHIU MING

FUNG SHUI KUEN v. R.

ATTORNEY GENERAL v. HO YU PING

THE QUEEN v. CHAN SUM HO

FUNG MAN WAI @ SAI WAI AND ANOTHER v. THE QUEEN