HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Magistracy Appeal1988

THE QUEEN v. WONG MUN YEE

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
16000-EN-1988-07-08

THE QUEEN v. WONG MUN YEE

HTML content

HCMA000421/1988

1988, No. 421
(Criminal)

 

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

H E A D N O T E

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

COMPENSATION ORDER - S.98 MAGISTRATES ORDINANCE - not to be made in advance of sentence.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 421 OF 1988

________________

BETWEEN

THE QUEENRespondent
and
WONG MUN YEEAppellant

________________

 

Coram: Hon. Bewley, J. in Court.

Date of hearing: 8th July, 1988.

Date of delivery of judgment: 8th July, 1988.

 

_______________

J U D G M E N T

_______________

 

1. The appellant was convicted on two charges of theft by Mr Sweeney at Western Magistrates Court. The magistrate ordered the appellant to pay compensation of $3,500 and then adjourned the case until October for sentence.

2. There was no merit in the appeal against the conviction which was dismissed.

3. Section 98 of the Magistrates Ordinance, Cap. 227, provides: -

"Where a magistrate makes an order under S.36(1) or convicts a person of an offence and passes such sentence (if any) as may otherwise by law be passed, he may, in addition to the order or sentence, order the offender to pay to any aggrieved person such compensation for -

(a)    personal injury;

(b)    loss of or damage to property; or

(c)    both such injury and loss or damage, not exceeding $5,000, as he thinks reasonable."

4. If a magistrate considers a compensation order appropriate, he may make the order in addition to any sentence he passes. It is not intended that a compensation order should preface sentence. The two matters are part and parcel of the magistrate's adjudication and are properly considered at the same time.

5. The magistrate said he was adjourning this case for sentence and is presumably contemplating passing sentence on the appellant. If and when he does so, he may also make a compensation order under this section, or a restitution order under section. 30 of the Theft Ordinance.

6. Meanwhile the appeal is allowed and the order quashed.

( E. de B. Bewley )
Judge of the High Court

Representation:

Mr J.A. Pethes, Senior Crown Counsel, for Respondent.

Miss Collette van der Eb, assigned by D.L.A., for Appellant.