HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Magistracy Appeal1989

THE QUEEN v. NG WAI-MAN

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
25343-EN-1989-07-14

THE QUEEN v. NG WAI-MAN

HTML content

HCMA000259/1989

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY APPEAL No. 259 OF 1909

 

BETWEEN

THE QUEEN

Respondent

AND

NG WAI-MAN

Appellant

Coram: de Basto, J.

Date of Hearing: 14 July 1989

Date of Judgment: 14 July 1989

 

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

J U D G M E N T

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

 

1. On the 10th of November, 1988 the appellant pleaded guilty to four charges of false accounting and was fined $3,000 on each charge.

2. On 29th November of last year the appellant applied for a review at the end of which the magistrate reduced the fines to $1,000 on each charge thus reducing the fines from $12,000 to $4,000.

3. Apparently an ICAC Officer was not present during that review and so there was a second review on the 14th December year at which the magistrate set aside the reduction to $1,000 on each charge.

4. On 21st December of last year he heard the facts again and on the first two charges he fined the appellant $3,000 each, and on the second two charges, $1,000 each making a total of $8,000.

5. The appellant was legally represented throughout. She feels aggrieved.

6. In the very unusual circumstances of this case, and I emphasise that, I uphold the appeal and set aside the fines on Charges A and B and reduce them from $3,000 to $1,000 on each charge.

(Gerald de Basto)
Judge of the High Court

Representation:

Miss Crebbin, Senior Crown Counsel for Crowd.

Mr. Richard WONG assigned by D.L.A. for appellant.