Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Sentencing and totality

Legal area

Court

15 Jul 2016

HKSAR v. LAW WAN TUNG

Citation

HKSAR v. LAW WAN TUNG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC86/2015

Leave to appeal was refused because none of the grounds against conviction or sentence were reasonably arguable: the trial judge's credibility findings were supported by detailed oral and medical evidence, the admission and limited use of uncharged acts for context was lawful, the medical evidence was capable of supporting the complainant's account, and the sentence of six years with fines was within appropriate range given seriousness and need for deterrence; the Court of Appeal declined to grant legal aid for the appeal.
24 Aug 2007

HKSAR v. HUNG KONG NAM AND ANOTHER

Citation

HKSAR v. HUNG KONG NAM AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC346/2006

The court upheld the trial judge's factual findings that P4 was voluntary and its admission would not be unfair; even if Rule II had been breached earlier, voluntariness and fairness govern admissibility; the circumstantial evidence was sufficiently compelling to permit the inference that the applicants knowingly participated in and supplied the suite of false documents (including credit cards) to the mainlanders; the sentences were within permissible range and totality was proper.
25 Jan 2007

HKSAR v. YEUNG HIU WING

Citation

HKSAR v. YEUNG HIU WING
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA989/2006

The magistrate lawfully rejected the appellant's exculpatory statements as not credible and, on the proved facts and surrounding circumstances, was entitled to draw the irresistible inference that the appellant knew the passports were false; accordingly the convictions were safe and the concurrent sentences of two years were appropriate and are affirmed.
24 Jan 2006

HKSAR v. OEI HENGKY WIRYO

Citation

HKSAR v. OEI HENGKY WIRYO
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC109/2005

Leave to appeal against convictions and sentences was dismissed: the trial judge properly admitted the seized documents for the narrow non‑hearsay purpose of showing they were bookmaking records and part of bookmaking paraphernalia; the Yenny note was properly found to be physically and functionally connected to the betting records; the international/ offshore argument was rejected because the judge found receipt and settlement of bets took place in Hong Kong; under s.25(1) Cap.455 the prosecution need not prove the funds in fact constituted proceeds of the underlying indictable offence; and…
21 Mar 2003

HKSAR v. CHOW CHE WAI

Citation

HKSAR v. CHOW CHE WAI
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC545/2001

The Court held the convictions were safe: the trial judge, having heard extended testimony from the accomplice (D1) and having addressed inconsistencies and credibility issues, was entitled to prefer D1's evidence and properly exercised discretion in not recalling witnesses; the applicant failed to rebut that evidence. The Court allowed the sentence appeal in part on totality grounds and reduced the aggregate term to three years by varying concurrency.
26 Feb 2003

HKSAR v. MAKHSSIAN, TRAJAN VAHE

Citation

HKSAR v. MAKHSSIAN, TRAJAN VAHE
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA1219/2002

The court held the magistrate's interventions and rulings were within proper judicial control and did not deny a fair trial; alleged non‑disclosure and the provision of PW2's notebook to the prosecution caused no demonstrated prejudice; the six‑month delay and separate prosecution did not breach rights or prejudice the defence; the facts found by the magistrate (appellant putting hand over potential witness's mouth and attempting to prevent statement) satisfied the elements of perverting the course of public justice at the investigative stage; arrest was supported by reasonable suspicion and…

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. LAW WAN TUNG

HKSAR v. HUNG KONG NAM AND ANOTHER

HKSAR v. YEUNG HIU WING

HKSAR v. OEI HENGKY WIRYO

HKSAR v. CHOW CHE WAI

HKSAR v. MAKHSSIAN, TRAJAN VAHE