The Queen v. Chu Tai-ming

Read the full judgment text of HCMA 1595/1988 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 2 February 1989.

1. The appellant pleaded guilty before a magistrate to a charge of remaining in Hong Kong without the authority of the Director of Immigration after having landed unlawfully contrary to section 38(1) (b) of the Immigration Ordinance, Cap. 115. He was sentenced to 15 months imprisonment.

Case No.HCMA 1595/1988
Court
High Court CFI
Date02 Feb 1989
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

HCMA001595/1988

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1595 of 1988

____________

BETWEEN

THE QUEEN

AND

CHU Tai-ming

_________

Coram: The Hon. Mr. Justice Wong in Court

Date of Hearing: 2 February 1989

Date of Delivery of Judgment: 2 February 1989

______________

J U D G N E N T

______________

1. The appellant pleaded guilty before a magistrate to a charge of remaining in Hong Kong without the authority of the Director of Immigration after having landed unlawfully contrary to section 38(1) (b) of the Immigration Ordinance, Cap. 115. He was sentenced to 15 months imprisonment.

2. The appellant was found on the 9th floor of a building under construction.

3. Mr. Sham for the Crown informed me that the policy of the Government to prosecute illegal immigrants remained the same as stated in The Queen v SO Man-King, Magistracy Appeal No. 408, of 1988. He further conceded chat the appellant was caught for the first time and the prosecution was not in a position to prove that the appellant was found on the construction site in a group of three or more illegal immigrants. He asked me to deal with the appeal on this basis.

4. In line with the decision of Bewley J in the Queen v LEE Yan-bi and WONG Wai-hing, Magistracy Appeal Nos. 1058 and 1062 of 1988 and the decision of Barnes J in The Queen v YAN Lap-man; Magistracy Appeal No. 1231 of 1988, I allow the appeal and reduce the sentence to six months imprisonment. The reduction is in accordance and in no way conflicts with the judgment in The Queen v SO man-king.

(Michael Wong)

Judge of the High Court

Representation:

Mr. Alain Sham, Crown Counsel for the Crown.

Mr. Louis Tong, assigned by D.L.A. for the appellant.