HKSAR v. Liu Yau Fook

Read the full judgment text of DCCC 815/2018 on BabelCite. This District Court judgment was delivered on 20 May 2019.

1. Although the defendant has been convicted after trial, aside from that, he would fit the normal categories of a person who would be eligible for a community service order.

Cited by 2 cases

Case No.DCCC 815/2018[2019] HKDC 662
Court
District Court
Date20 May 2019
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

DCCC 815/2018

[2019] HKDC 662

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 815 OF 2018

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

  HKSAR  
  v  
  Liu Yau-fook (D3)

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

Before: HH Judge Casewell
Date: 20 May 2019 at 11.02 am
Present: Mr Kamlesh Arjan Sadhwani, leading Mr Emmanuel Benami, counsel on fiat, for HKSAR
Mr Oliver Davies, instructed by Paul Kwong & Co, for the 3rd defendant
Offence: (1) Attempting to export unmanifested cargo 
(企圖輸出未列艙單貨物)
(2) Attempting to export specimens of Appendix II species without licence
(沒有許可證而企圖出口附錄II物種的標本)

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.Although the defendant has been convicted after trial, aside from that, he would fit the normal categories of a person who would be eligible for a community service order.

2.Although the normal sentence on conviction for this offence would normally be a sentence of imprisonment, there are cases where a non-custodial sentence such as a suspended sentence have been imposed.

3.My reasons for not imposing immediate custodial sentence in respect of this defendant would be his age (69 now), his clear record, the conviction been on the basis that the  statutory defence was not made out on the evidence, and his limited role and involvement in the offences. 

4.He made a substantial error of judgment by getting involved in this enterprise, but he does appear to have been used by the participants.  He is certainly not the mastermind in any shape or form.  He says his reward was $900, and I understand that he has even lost the boat on which the goods were at one point moved.

5.As I say, finally, there is the result of the report, which recommends the defendant for community service disposal.  

6.So having taken all those factors into consideration, I will impose an order, subject to the defendant’s consent.

COURT:

Mr Liu, the order in fact requires your consent, so you have got to be aware of the conditions. The court would require that you perform a total of 200 hours community service on each of these charges. They will be served concurrently, so it is a total of 200 hours of community service.

So you must provide unpaid work at the directions and instigation of a supervising officer whose scheme that you will be part of. You must provide this work under the direction of and supervision of the supervising officer. You must complete it within the time allocated to you and in any event within 12 months of today. If you have any difficulty completing the work within that period, you must refer the matter back to the court through your supervising officer.

You must keep the peace and be of good behaviour generally. If you breach any of the conditions of the order or commit any further offence punishable by imprisonment during the currency of the order, you will be liable to be brought back to this court and sentenced again for these offences of which you were originally convicted.

There will also be a reporting condition on the order that you sign; you must comply with that as well.

Now, do you understand the terms and conditions of the order?

DEFENDANT: Yes, I understand.

COURT: Do you consent to to perform the community service work?

DEFENDANT: Yes, I do.

COURT: All right. That will be the order then.

  (T Casewell)
  District Judge

Other Judgments in This Case

Further hearings and rulings under DCCC 815/2018