HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Magistracy Appeal1999

HKSAR v. LEE WAI SHING

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
33694-EN-1999-10-08

HKSAR v. LEE WAI SHING

HTML content

HCMA000897/1999

HCMA897/99

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO.897 OF 1999

(On Appeal from KTCC2808 OF 1998)

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

BETWEEN
HKSARRespondent
AND
LEE WAI SHINGAppellant

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

Coram : Hon Nguyen J. in Court

Date of hearing : 8 October 1999

Date of judgment : 8 October 1999

 

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

J U D G M E N T

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

 

1. The previous periods of detention are :

(i) 20th January to 26th February 1999 - this was because the Appellant was absent from Court on 17th December 1998;

(ii) 17th May to 31st May 1999 - this was for the Court to obtain a DATC report;

(iii) 23rd July 1999 to date - this was because the Appellant was absent from Court on 30th June 1999 and also for a DATC report to be obtained on 23rd July 1999.

The report was available on 10th August 1999 and the sentence of six months' imprisonment was passed on that day.

2. The previous periods of detention were necessitated by the Appellant being absent from Court on two occasions, therefore he cannot complain that these previous periods of detention have increased the length of the term of imprisonment.

3. The sentence of six months is not manifestly excessive. The appeal is dismissed.

 

 

(Peter Nguyen)
Judge of the Court of First Instance,
High Court

 

Representation:

Miss Winnie Ho, SGC of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR

Appellant in person, present