TAM MAN-TAT AND OTHERS v. THE QUEEN

CACC000348/1981

 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

 

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 348 OF 1981

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

 

BETWEEN
	TAM MAN-TAT	Appellants
	TONG KING-CHUNG
	CHEUNG KAM-FAI
	and
	THE QUEEN	Respondent

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

Coram: LIU, J. in Court

Date of Judgment: 11th May 1981

 

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

JUDGMENT

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

1. The three appellants are young people aged 18, 22 and 19 respectively. They were charged with disorderly conduct. On the facts admitted, they were making themselves a terrible nuisance in the Mcdonald Fast Food Shop. They were teasing one of the young helpers and lady customers. The staff found them unmanageable They were rowdy, throwing cigarette butte about and from time to time putting their feet on the chairs and with intermittent bursts of abusive language.

2. They were brought before the learned Magistrate, pleaded guilty and were each bound over for $500 for a year to be of good behaviour, but they all had their convictions recorded.

3. In this appeal against sentence, the Court is invited to vary the sentence of each so that their convictions would not be recorded.

4.The learned Magistrate, one of our very experienced Magistrates, for reasons given, decided to have their convictions recorded. Mr. Sedgwick for the appellants submitted that the appellants were young man on the threshold of their lives, hitherto of good character and making every endeavour to seek employment. It was conceded that their conduct, unbecoming and rude, should not lightly be condoned. Counsel hastened to state the obvious that young people do, from time to time, behave out of character. These appellants were unruly, and they were creating great annoyance to the public and disturbance to the lawful business of the ...(illegible) Fast Food Shop. Much embarressement was caused to the young attendant and time of the police officers was wasted.

5. The same plea in mitigation was re-ventilated. In addition, it was urged that their unruly conduct was accompanied by little true criminal intent. This Court does not pretend to be wiser than the learned Magistrate, but having been exhaustively assisted by counsel for the appellants, particularly bearing in mind the fact that if these young men were utterly irresponsible, they would hardly be as concerned with having their convictions on record, it is found possible but not without a large does of mercy to accede to their appeals. The proceedings they have been taken through together with the leniency so generously given to-day will, I hope, be a good lesson to them for a long time to come. I therefore order that the appeal against the sentence be allowed to the extent that the convictions of the appellants be not recorded.

 

 

	(B. LIU)
	Judge of the High Court

 

Representation:

Mr. F. Whitehouse, counsel for Respondent.

Mr. A.W. Sedgwick instructed by Ip, Ku & stoppa for Appellant.