Read the full judgment text of CACC 429/2007 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 12 September 2008 before Tang VP, Yeung JA, Fung J.
Criminal law – arson – reckless as to whether life of another would be endangered – sentencing – whether 6½ years' imprisonment manifestly excessive – starting point for arson in multi-storey residential building – whether case involves triad conduct, intimidation or revenge – mitigating factors – family dispute – spur of the moment – clear record – severe burns to applicant covering 30% of body area – use of essential oil rather than petrol or kerosene – whether starting point of 8 years appropriate – The Queen v Shum Hon Kai & another considered and distinguished – Chau Yuk-kuen v R considered – Tsoi Tin v R considered – HKSAR v Cheung Wing Siu considered – HKSAR v Lo Po Tak referenced – sentencing guidelines not laid down due to varying gravity of arson cases – arson is extremely serious offence and deterrent sentences required – appeal against sentence allowed – sentence reduced from 6½ years to 4 years' imprisonment
Legal issues: Whether starting point of 8 years' imprisonment applies for arson in a multi-storey residential building · Whether 6½ years' imprisonment is manifestly excessive given mitigating factors
Outcome: Application for leave to appeal against conviction abandoned and dismissed. Appeal against sentence allowed; sentence reduced from 6½ years' imprisonment to 4 years.
Cites 5 cases