Oscar Lai Ka-to v. R.

CACC000229/1992

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

1992, No.229
(Criminal)

___________

___________

Coram: Hon. Power, V.-P., Mortimer, J.A. and Sears, J.

Date of hearing: 11 May 1994

Date of judgment: 11 May 1994

________________

J U D G M E N T

________________

Re Sentence:

Power, V.-P.:

1. This is the decision of the court.

2. We will not repeat the facts which were canvassed in the judgment which we delivered yesterday and which have been repeated this morning by Mr. Martin Lee Q.C. who appears with Miss Lisa Wong for the applicant. Mr. Lee suggests that when considering this offence we must bear in mind that Reid was to do no more than keep the prosecution short which is, he suggests, something that would have been in the interest of everyone concerned. An illicit liaison between prosecuting counsel and a defence team whatever is planned to be done is, without more, a matter of extreme gravity. It strikes at the heart of the proper administration of justice. It throws to the wind all considerations of professional integrity. It is itself misconduct of the most serious kind and it opens the way to worse. This court would be failing in its duty if it took any other view of this offence. We bear in mind that seven years overall was imposed by the trial judge after conviction on five counts. This was, in our view, an overall sentence of very considerable leniency. We feel we should say no more in that regard.

3. The gravity of the offence standing alone warrants a substantial custodial sentence. The applicant motivated by greed and probably by a desire to enhance his standing as a man who could get things done involved himself in activities which threatened the integrity of our system of law enforcement.

4. We take into account what has been urged by Mr. Lee as to his medical condition. We bear in mind that this was a first offence.

5. The application will be allowed. The hearing of the application will be treated as the hearing of the appeal and the sentence of seven years will be varied to one of five years.

Representation:

Mr. A. Huggins, Q.C. and Mr. A. Chan (Messrs. Herbert Smith) for the Respondent

Mr. Martin Lee, Q.C. & Miss Lisa Wong (Messrs. Kenneth K.C. Wong & Co.) for the Appellant.