Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Cultivation of cannabis

Legal area

Court

20 Jan 2023

HKSAR v. NGUYEN THANG LOI

Citation

[2023] HKCA 103
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC145/2019

The Court dismissed the appeals, holding (1) partly consecutive sentences were permissible where distinct offences (cultivation and trafficking) exist and did not constitute impermissible double counting; (2) scientific evidence shows herbal cannabis and resin now have similar average THC levels, warranting revised sentencing bands; (3) sentencing for cultivation should continue to be based on estimated annual yield with courts adjusting within bands for role, scale, THC levels and other aggravating/mitigating factors; and (4) the proposed revised tariffs and cultivation bands set out by the…
20 Jan 2023

HKSAR v. DANG HUNG NGOC

Citation

[2023] HKCA 103
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC217/2019

Appeals dismissed; (1) partially consecutive sentences were permissible because trafficking and cultivation were distinct offences generating additional culpability; (2) scientific evidence demonstrates substantial increase in THC potency such that herbal cannabis and cannabis resin should be treated similarly for sentencing purposes; (3) sentencing guidelines revised: trafficking bands expanded upward and cultivation sentencing to be based on estimated annual yield with specified bands; trial judge's starting points and discounts were within lawful range and sentences are upheld.
24 Dec 2021

HKSAR v. HUI KIN WA

Citation

[2021] HKCA 2001
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC167/2021

Leave to appeal was refused because the judge did not misapply the authorities (notably Cheung King Kong); the difference in starting points was not material or demonstrably wrong in principle, the discretionary reductions (including for some personal consumption) were within judicial discretion, and any issue about concurrency of the trafficking charge did not render the sentence manifestly excessive.
13 Mar 2020

HKSAR v. DANG HUNG NGOC

Citation

[2020] HKCA 167
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC217/2019

Given the large commercial scale demonstrated by the estimated annual yield and extensive cultivation apparatus, a starting point of 11 years’ imprisonment was appropriate; a reduced discount of 2 years and 6 months (about 23%) for a plea indicated late in the process was justified; leave to appeal was granted only on the appropriateness of starting points and culpability factors and not on the plea discount; the case was to be joined with Nguyen Thang Loi and Appeal Aid granted.
10 Jan 2020

HKSAR v. NGUYEN THANG LOI

Citation

[2020] HKCA 42
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC145/2019

Leave to appeal against sentence was granted because the grounds advanced were reasonably arguable: there is merit to the contention that partial consecutiveness may have amounted to double counting given the close link between quantities seized, and there is a reasonably arguable challenge to the starting point for Count 2 requiring appellate reassessment of the applicant's role and the sentencing approach.
16 Oct 2013

HKSAR v. NGUYEN THU HA

Citation

HKSAR v. NGUYEN THU HA
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC335/2013

Leave to appeal against sentence dismissed because the sentencing judge lawfully and properly assessed seriousness by reference to expert estimated annual yield, correctly characterized the applicant as a paid gardener aware of trafficking, set a generous 20 month starting point and justified a 45% discount to 11 months; the activated prior suspended sentence resulting in a total of 13 months remains appropriate.

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. NGUYEN THANG LOI

HKSAR v. DANG HUNG NGOC

HKSAR v. HUI KIN WA

HKSAR v. DANG HUNG NGOC

HKSAR v. NGUYEN THANG LOI

HKSAR v. NGUYEN THU HA