8 Jul 2020
Bail pending appeal was refused because the applicant had served only about 5 months of an aggregate 17-month sentence and, even on the most favourable view, that period was insufficient to reflect the seriousness of the offences; therefore there was no sufficient basis to grant bail pending appeal.
3 Mar 2020
The sentencing judge's selection of starting points and imposition of partly consecutive sentences, with a one-third discount for guilty plea, was within the appropriate range given the number and rapid succession of dishonesty offences, the substantial potential loss and applicable authorities; the applicant's personal mitigation did not justify a greater reduction, and therefore the application for leave to appeal against sentence was refused.
23 Nov 2018
Leave to appeal and a certificate for legal aid were granted because it was reasonably arguable that the sentencing starting point of 3 years was excessive in the circumstances of this case given the transactional amounts, the actual loss of HK$7,917 and other mitigating features, thereby justifying appellate review.
22 Dec 2016
Leave to appeal against sentence refused because the sentencing judge correctly applied established principles for credit card fraud, selected unimpeachable starting points (30 months for attempted obtaining property by deception and 9 months for theft by finding), applied appropriate plea discounts, and properly rejected familial or financial hardship as sufficient to reduce an otherwise appropriate deterrent sentence; concurrent ordering was appropriate.
27 Nov 2002
The Magistrate acted within her sentencing discretion in concluding that compulsory drug treatment at a DATC was appropriate in the appellant's and the public interest given the facts and antecedents; there was no error warranting interference and the appeal against sentence is dismissed.
18 Jul 1997
Given the sophistication of the fraud, the intended large loss, the likelihood of absconding and lack of evidence of entrapment, the Court held the judge's 4-year starting point reduced by one-third for guilty pleas to 3 years was within the appropriate range and not manifestly excessive.
20 Jun 1997
The trial judge's credibility findings and assessment of the evidence were reasonable and not open to appellate interference; police were not obliged to verify external telephone/fax registrations and omissions did not render verdict unsafe; sentencing for the identity‑card offence required differentiation from illegal‑immigrant tariff cases and the appropriate sentence was reduced from 10 to 6 months, to remain consecutive to the relevant sentence.
30 Apr 1996
The Court upheld convictions on the 1st and 3rd charges because the evidence (faxed altered application, release of goods, dishonoured cheques and lack of funds) supported a finding of dishonest intent; the 4th charge was quashed because the judge's findings addressed a dishonoured cheque rather than proof that a bankers draft had been agreed or lodged as charged; the out‑of‑time appeal against sentence was dismissed for lack of satisfactory explanation and because the sentence was not manifestly excessive.
22 Mar 1994
The trial judge erred in starting with an overall sentence and then apportioning it; the correct approach is to fix appropriate individual sentences for each offence, then consider totality and mitigation. The original sentences were manifestly inadequate for the criminality involved. The Court substituted higher terms: for Chan Piu Sang (1st respondent) 1 year on the 1st charge and 3 years on the 3rd charge to run consecutively (total 4 years); for Chung Kwok On (2nd respondent) 1 year on the 2nd charge and 2 years on the 13th charge to run concurrently (total 2 years). These substitutions r…