HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Criminal Appeal1978

MAN KWOK-WO 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
714-EN-1979-02-06

MAN KWOK-WO v. THE QUEEN

HTML content

CACC001166/1978

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL1978 No.1166
(Criminal)

BETWEEN:
MAN Kwok-woAppellant

AND

THE QUEENRespondent

Coram: Briggs, C.J., Huggins & Pickering, JJ.A.

Date of Judgment: 6 February 1979

 

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

JUDGMENT

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

 

1. The appellant pleaded guilty to two charges of having carnal knowledge of a girl under the age of 13 years. He was sentenced to six years' imprisonment on each charge, the sentences to be served concurrently.

2. The facts are simple. The appellant lived in a hut at a transit centre in Lok Man Road, Chai Wan. The victim was in the habit of going to his hut to watch television and to listen to music. At the time of the offences, she was aged 12 years and nine months. No force was used and she appears to have been a willing victim. She did not complain to her parents and the offences only came to light when she showed obvious signs of pregnancy. The victim was delivered of a girl on the 23rd August, 1978.

3. Counsel, who appeared for the appellant, drew the attention of the court to five cases of a similar nature which have been before the courts since 1974. In no case was a sentence as great as that imposed in this case passed. The highest sentence was one of four years' imprisonment but it is also noticeable that in one case a probation order was made.

4. The appellant is now aged 31 and has a clear record. He has expressed contrition for the offences and, as I have said, he pleaded guilty to the offences. We think that the sentence of six years' imprisonment is excessive and we will allow the appeal against sentence to the extent of reducing the sentence to one of two and a half years' imprisonment.

 

 

(Geoffrey Briggs)
President.

 

Representation:

P. Yu & P. Nguyan (DLA) for Appellant

Stanbury for Crown/Respondent