Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Human smuggling

Legal area

Court

18 Feb 2009

HKSAR v. HO KOON HUNG AND ANOTHER

Citation

HKSAR v. HO KOON HUNG AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC86/2008

The appellants were properly found to have been jointly in charge of the vessel so a 5-year starting point per count was appropriate; the circumstances of concealment, poor safety equipment and lack of lights justified an 18-month uplift per count; but the judge erred in his approach to totality and in ordering consecutive sentences—sentences on the two counts should run concurrently resulting in an aggregate sentence of 4 years and 4 months imprisonment after discount for guilty pleas.
13 Aug 2002

HKSAR v. CHENG KWONG CHUNG AND OTHERS

Citation

HKSAR v. CHENG KWONG CHUNG AND OTHERS
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC536/2001

The Court held the convictions and sentences should be upheld: surveillance, documentary and witness evidence provided ample factual basis for concluding the applicants participated in conspiracies to possess false American passports and to defraud United Airlines; the trial judge properly applied legal principles on identification and on the meaning of 'defraud'; the paired conspiracy charges were materially distinct and did not constitute abuse of process; and the sentences were not manifestly excessive given the seriousness and planning involved in human smuggling and exploitation.
8 Jan 1999

HKSAR v. CHEUNG CHUN

Citation

HKSAR v. CHEUNG CHUN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC539/1998

The 5-year starting point was appropriate given the applicant was acting captain, immigrants were concealed in the forehold and the vessel lacked safety equipment; the 1/3 reduction for a guilty plea was properly applied; acting under orders/keeping a job is not mitigating; therefore leave to appeal against sentence is refused.
3 Oct 1995

R. v. TANG SING MO

Citation

R. v. TANG SING MO
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC298/1995

The Court of Appeal held that the sentencing judge did not err in principle in adopting a five-year starting point for the immigration offence given the defendant's role in bringing five illegal entrants into Hong Kong, and that the reduction to three years three months after allowing mitigation (youth, clear record, guilty plea) was within permissible sentencing discretion; the appeal against sentence was refused.
14 Sept 1995

R. v. CHEUNG CHI MAU

Citation

R. v. CHEUNG CHI MAU
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC250/1995

The Court upheld the conviction and 3-year sentence because the applicant knowingly assisted unauthorized entrants in an unsafe vessel carrying three heavily pregnant women, an aggravating factor that justified limiting the guilty-plea discount and sustaining a substantial sentence; the sentence was not manifestly excessive and leave to appeal was refused.

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. HO KOON HUNG AND ANOTHER

HKSAR v. CHENG KWONG CHUNG AND OTHERS

HKSAR v. CHEUNG CHUN

R. v. TANG SING MO

R. v. CHEUNG CHI MAU