HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Criminal Appeal1972

LAU HAY WAH v. THE QUEEN

Related cases with same parties

  • CAAR10/1992THE QUEEN v. WONG MOK DIN
  • CAAR11/1986THE QUEEN v. CHUNG WAI-YIU
  • CAAR12/1986THE QUEEN v. HSU SAI-MAN AND ANOTHER
  • CAAR15/1986THE QUEEN v. WU KAM MING AND OTHERS
  • CAAR15/1987THE QUEEN v. LEUNG WING FAI
  • CAAR16/1987THE QUEEN v. PANG CHEUNG KIM
  • CAAR19/1986THE QUEEN v. CHAN CHI MAN
  • CAAR22/1986THE QUEEN v. WONG TAK-CHI
  • CAAR23/1986THE QUEEN v. MA LAI WU AND OTHERS
  • CAAR4/1986THE QUEEN v. LY XUONG THANH
  • CAAR5/1986THE QUEEN v. YEUNG KAM-WAH (D1) AND ANOTHER
  • CAAR8/1986THE QUEEN v. ALBERT STANLEY MALIA
  • CAAR9/1986THE QUEEN v. CHU TAI WAI AND ANOTHER
  • CAAR9/1989THE QUEEN v. CHAN KOON KWOK ARTHUR
  • CACC1000/1976LAI FAT v. THE QUEEN
  • CACC1000/1983THE QUEEN v. LEE HEI KEUNG
  • CACC1001/1979LAW WAI-MING AND ANOTHER v. THE QUEEN
  • CACC100/1972LIU KAM-MAN v. THE QUEEN
  • CACC100/1973LO WAI KEUNG v. THE QUEEN
  • CACC100/1977TAM YUK-MUI (F) v. THE QUEEN
4756-EN

LAU HAY WAH v. THE QUEEN

HTML content

CACC000485/1972

 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(APPELLATE JURISDICTION)

 

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 485 OF 1972

-----------------

 

BETWEEN  
 LAU HAY WAHAppellant
 and 
 THE QUEENRespondent

-----------------

Coram: Leonard, J.

Date of Judgment:

 

-----------------

JUDGMENT

-----------------

 

1. This is an appeal against sentence. The appellant was guilty of the offence of robbery. This offence was committed in the afternoon of the 12th of April 1972. The robbery was committed in the company of others but no weapons were used. A young couple were approached by the appellant and the other two persons and they were robbed of cash and a wrist watch. The incident occurred in a quiet suburb of Kowloon, at Kadoorie Avenue near Braga Circuit. It is quite clear that the appellant and his friends must have gone there in order to commit the offence. He has suggested to me that he passed through there naturally on his way to the cinema. Knowing the locality I regard this as a deliberate lie. On the other hand, I have had the advantage of seeing the parents of the appellant. They are obviously decent people who are appalled at his behaviour. There is no shadow of doubt that he deserves to go to the training centre where the learned magistrate decided that he should be sent.

2. On the other hand, this is his first offence. The probation officer has given a very favourable report. Having considered the matter most carefully, and having had the advantage, that the learned magistrate has not had, of seeing and hearing the parents of the appellant I consider there is room for lenience.

3. In all the circumstances of the case, I am prepared to allow this appeal. The appellant will be placed on probation for a period of two years. During the period of that probation he shall reside with his parents. For the first six months of the probation he shall be indoors every evening not later that 9.30 p.m. It shall be a further condition of probation that the probationer shall attend such educational courses as the probation officer may from time to time suggest.

 

 

 (P.F.X. Leonard)

 

Representation: