Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Double counting

Legal area

Court

15 Jan 2026

HKSAR v. SUEN KIN WING

Citation

[2026] HKCA 27
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC147/2024

Leave to appeal against sentence was granted on Grounds 2 (quantum of proceeds) and 3 (manifest excessiveness) because those grounds were reasonably arguable; leave was refused on Ground 1 (knowledge of predicate offence) because the judge did not err in relying on the admitted Summary of Facts and particulars to infer the applicant knew or had reasonable grounds to believe the funds were proceeds of fraud/theft and the applicant had been sentenced only for the money laundering offences.
26 Nov 2025

HKSAR v. CHAN WAI HANG AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2025] HKCA 960
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC116/2025

Leave to appeal was refused because the judge correctly applied Nguyen Thang Loi and the sentencing approach in Herry Jane Yusuph, the sentence enhancements for operating a packaging/distribution centre and for joint enterprise were supportable on the facts and not impermissibly duplicative in respect of D1 (and not reasonably arguable for D2), and the scientific challenge to Dr Lai's study had not been supported by contrary expert evidence and was therefore not reasonably arguable.
28 Sept 2018

HKSAR v. GALVIS SILVA PAOLA ANDREA

Citation

[2018] HKCA 656
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC133/2018

Leave to appeal against sentence refused: the judge adopted appropriate starting points, correctly treated Form 8 status as aggravating, permissibly adjusted the guilty plea discount because of the applicant's failure to surrender, and applied limited humanitarian reduction for pregnancy; although the judge erred in not properly considering activation of a suspended sentence under s109C, that error did not render the overall sentence excessive.
8 Jun 2018

HKSAR v. LEUNG CHI WAI

Citation

[2018] HKCA 319
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC357/2017

Leave to appeal was confined to issues arguably sustainable: the court held it was not reasonably arguable that the judge double‑counted aggravating factors for Charge 2, but it was reasonably arguable that the 6‑month enhancement for Charge 2 (solely for persistent offending) was excessive and that the totality principle may not have been adequately applied to the aggregate 40‑month sentence; accordingly limited leave to appeal was granted (grounds 3‑5 and ground 3 only as to Charge 2).
3 Aug 2010

HKSAR v. YUNG CHI LOK

Citation

HKSAR v. YUNG CHI LOK
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC8/2010

The court held that although the sentencing judge's starting point and aggravating assessment were within an arguable range and the two conspiracies merited consecutive sentences in principle, the totality of 10 years 8 months was excessive; the appropriate global sentence is 9 years 6 months achieved by ordering 3 years 2 months of the second sentence to run consecutively to the 6 years 4 months from the first and the remainder concurrent, thereby correcting totality without finding impermissible double-counting.

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. SUEN KIN WING

HKSAR v. CHAN WAI HANG AND ANOTHER

HKSAR v. GALVIS SILVA PAOLA ANDREA

HKSAR v. LEUNG CHI WAI

HKSAR v. YUNG CHI LOK