Read the full judgment text of CACC 96/2020 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 31 December 2020 before Zervos JA.
Criminal law – sentencing – attempted arson with intent – possession of offensive weapons in a public place – petrol bombs – 2019 Hong Kong social unrest protests – police operation to clear barricades in Tseung Kwan O – plea of guilty – one-third discount – starting point – aggravating factors – reliance on UK Sentencing Council guidelines for public order offences – whether reliance on UK Guidelines without prior warning to the defence amounted to a denial of natural justice – whether the elements of culpability and harm in the UK public order guidelines can inform sentencing for arson in Hong Kong – whether a 6-year starting point for attempted arson with petrol bombs was manifestly excessive – held that the judge did not follow or apply the UK Guidelines' approach but only drew upon them in general terms to identify relevant sentencing principles – held that the principles of culpability and harm are well known to this jurisdiction and their use did not warrant appellate intervention – held that arson warrants heavy deterrent sentences and a customary starting point of 4 to 6 years' imprisonment applies in Hong Kong – held that the 6-year starting point was not manifestly excessive in the light of aggravating features – premeditation, manufacture of petrol bombs, disguise to evade detection, and direct targeting of police officers clearing barricades – District Court arson cases arising from the 2019 protests adopted starting points of 5 years or more – application for leave to appeal refused – applicant reminded of right to renew application with warning as to possible loss of time direction – sentencing: Charge 1 starting point 2 years 6 months reduced by one-third for guilty plea to 1 year 8 months; Charge 2 starting point 6 years reduced by one-third for guilty plea to 4 years; sentences concurrent, total 4 years' imprisonment.
Legal issues: Reliance on UK Sentencing Guidelines without prior warning · Applicability of UK public order guidelines to arson offence · Whether 6-year starting point for attempted arson was manifestly excessive
Outcome: Application for leave to appeal against sentence refused.
Cited by 27 cases · Cites 9 cases