Read the full judgment text of CACC 491/1999 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 9 November 2000 before Mayo V-P, Wong JA, Keith JA.
Criminal law – deception – theft – evading liability by deception – procuring entry in bank record by deception – sentencing – substituted conviction – relevance of consequential loss – manifest excessiveness – extension of time for leave to appeal – Theft Ordinance (Cap 210) – maximum sentence – totality – clear record – concurrent sentences – forfeiture of trust – amounts of $1.07m and $3.3m – no repayment – starting point 2.5 years reduced by 6 months – final sentence 2 years imprisonment – appeal against conviction on first charge dismissed – conviction on second charge substituted – application for leave to appeal against sentence dismissed – sentence on substituted charge 2 years concurrent – extension of time granted
Legal issues: Effect of substituted conviction on sentence · Relevance of consequential loss to sentencing · Manifest excessiveness of sentence · Extension of time to appeal against sentence
Outcome: Appeal against conviction on first charge dismissed; conviction on second charge substituted to evading liability by deception; application for leave to appeal against sentence on first charge dismissed; sentence on substituted charge of two years' imprisonment imposed concurrent with sentence on first charge.
Cited by 2 cases