HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Magistracy Appeal1995

THE QUEEN v. WONG LAM-HOI

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
16567-EN-1996-03-06

THE QUEEN v. WONG LAM-HOI

HTML content

HCMA001133/1995

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 1133 OF 1995

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

BETWEEN
THE QUEENRespondent
AND
WONG LAM-HOIAppellant

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

Coram : Hon Duffy, J. in Court

Dates of hearing : 15 February and 1 March 1996

Date of handing down judgment : 6 March 1996

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

J U D G M E N T

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

1. This was an appeal against a sentence of eight months imposed for two offences against the Dutiable Commodities Ordinance. In his Reasons for Sentence, the learned Magistrate said this :

" An immediate prison term was inevitable for this type of case and I considered the terms should be concurrent bearing in mind the subject matter of the A and B charges were linked. I used a twelve months starting point and reduced the term by one third - two months for the defendant's plea (limited discount being given in view of the defendant's record) and a further two months for the defendant's assistance to the Customs & Excise Department notwithstanding his handsome financial remuneration for that. I accordingly sentenced the defendant to concurrent terms of eight months imprisonment."

2. I agreed entirely with all that the learned Magistrate had to say except that I felt that in the circumstances the Appellant deserved a greater discount for his assistance to the Customs & Excise Department. Courts should go a long way towards encouraging criminals to assist the authorities in prosecuting their former accomplices. I would have allowed a discount of four months for the Appellant's assistance in this case. I therefore allowed the appeal to the extent of reducing the sentences from eight months to six months. Both will be served concurrently.

Representation:

Mr P.S. Chapman, C.C., for Crown (appearing on 15.2.1996)

Mr Albert Wong, S.C.C., for Crown (appearing on 1.3.1996)

Appellant Wong Lam Hoi in person

- 2 -

(J.M. Duffy)
Judge of the High Court