HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Magistracy Appeal1999

HKSAR v. KWOK KAI CHUNG

Related cases with same parties

  • CAAR11/1997HKSAR v. YIP CHI TUNG
  • CAAR1/1998HKSAR v. LING VERONICA
  • CAAR12/1996HKSAR v. WONG KWONG YICK
  • CAAR6/1998HKSAR v. LAU SHIU KONG AND ANOTHER
  • CAAR6/2012HKSAR v. LEUNG KWOK CHI
  • CAAR9/2001HKSAR v. WONG TO LEUNG
  • CACC100/1997HKSAR v. YU HON CHUN
  • CACC100/1999HKSAR v. LAM CHI KIN
  • CACC100/2000HKSAR v. SHING KUEN KIN
  • CACC100/2001HKSAR v. OU YANG MING CHYUAN
  • CACC100/2002HKSAR v. CHAN LAI SING AND ANOTHER
  • CACC100/2003HKSAR v. CHENG CHONG SHING
  • CACC100/2022HKSAR v. LIMBU PRASHANT
  • CACC101/1997HKSAR v. YIU KENNETH LIK KIN
  • CACC101/2001HKSAR v. LEUNG KWAI PING
  • CACC101/2021HKSAR v. WONG CHI FUNG AND ANOTHER
  • CACC10/1997HKSAR v. MAN KAM SHING
  • CACC10/1998HKSAR v. CHAN CHUN TAK
  • CACC10/2001HKSAR v. TAM KWAI KEUNG AND ANOTHER
  • CACC10/2002HKSAR v. WONG WAN SHAN
20121-EN-1999-05-11

HKSAR v. KWOK KAI CHUNG

HTML content

HCMA000305/1999

1999, No. MA305

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

(APPELLATE JURISDICTION)

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 305 OF 1999

_______________

BETWEEN
HKSARRespondent
AND
KWOK KAI CHUNGAppellant

________________

Coram: The Honourable Mrs Justice V. Bokhary in Court

Date of Hearing: 11 May 1999

Date of Delivery of Judgment: 11 May 1999

________________

J U D G M E N T

________________

1. The Appellant was tried before Colin Mackinosh Esquire in the Magistrate's Court at Eastern on one charge of theft. On 24th February 1999, he was convicted and sentenced to six months' imprisonment.

2. He has lodged a Notice of Appeal against Conviction in the standard form but has written no ground of appeal thereon. He has also lodged a Notice of Appeal against Sentence in the standard form but has added nothing to the proforma ground therein that his sentence was too severe.

3. The Magistrate has prepared a very careful Statement of Findings and equally careful Reasons for Sentence. I propose to say no more than that I am fully satisfied of the propriety of the conviction and of the sentence.

4. The appeal against conviction is dismissed, and so is the appeal against sentence.

(V. Bokhary)
Judge of the Court of First Instance,
High Court

Representation:

Kwok Kai-chung, Appellant in person

Mr Paul K. Madigan (of the Department of Justice) for the Respondent