HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Criminal Appeal1978

WONG SIU-HAR (F) 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
2000-EN-1978-04-07

WONG SIU-HAR (F) v. THE QUEEN

HTML content

CACC000225/1978

 

IN THE SUPREME COURTCriminal Appeal
 1978 No. 225

BETWEEN:  
 WONG Siu-har (F)Appellant
 and 
 THE QUEENRespondent

Coram: Briggs, C.J.

Date of Judgment: 7th April, 1978.

 

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

JUDGMENT

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

 

1. The appellant pleaded guilty to one offence of keeping a disorderly house on 12th February, 1978. She now applies to this court for leave to appeal against her conviction out of time. What is really intended is that she should be allowed to reverse her plea of guilty and to have her case re-opened.

2. In the record before me there is no evidence whatsoever of keeping a disorderly house. There is evidence that there was a disorderly house and that the appellant was a prostitute working in that house. That is all. There is nothing on the record to show that the appellant owned the establishment or paid rent for the premises or was otherwise connected with the premises other than as a prostitute.

3. In the event, I think justice would best be done if the conviction and sentence are set aside and the case be remitted to a magistrate for re-hearing upon the appellant pleading not guilty to the offence. The appellant is on bail and bail will be continued on the same terms as at present until further order.

 

 

 (Geoffrey Briggs)
 Chief Justice.

 

Representation:

Sparrow (John Ip & Co.) for appellant.

Aiken for the Crown/Respondent.