Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Sentence disparity between co-defendants

Legal area

Court

24 Dec 1999

HKSAR v. LEUNG YIU MING AND ANOTHER

Citation

HKSAR v. LEUNG YIU MING AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC494/1999

The court granted an extension of time because the applicants had a satisfactory explanation for delay but refused leave to appeal because the situation involved sentences imposed on different occasions by different judges. Applying the principle in So Hung Lee and Stroud the proper inquiry was whether Gall J's sentences were appropriate; they were within the Lau Tak Ming guidelines and the Recorder's lower starting point was justifiable by reference to totality and fewer offences, so there was no basis for interference.
15 Jul 1986

THE QUEEN v. CHAN KWAN SHUI

Citation

THE QUEEN v. CHAN KWAN SHUI
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC178/1986

The presumption under section 47 arose because the applicant was in control of the car; the trial judge was entitled to find that the presumption was not rebutted in light of the totality of evidence including the applicant's conduct (flight), therefore conviction was upheld; the four year sentence was within established guidelines and the disparity with the co-defendant's three year sentence (reduced for guilty plea) did not warrant interference.