HKSAR v. Chuk Kin Fat

DCCC 187/2011

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL ACTION NO. 187 OF 2011

---------------------

---------------------

Reasons for Sentence

1.The Defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of criminal damage. He PNG to the burglary charge. This Court ordered the charge to be left on Court’s file and not to be proceeded with without the leave of the Court.

The facts of the case :-

2.The Defendant was the contractor who carried out the renovation works for PW1’s house in Fei Ngor Shan.

3.On the material day, the Defendant went to see PW1 to collect the outstanding $50,000.  PW1 ignored him.

4.Later,  PW1 saw the Defendant climb into his rear garden.  The son of PW1 released some dogs to drive the Defendant out. 

5.PW1 found the 4 metal bars on the fence were damaged.

6.The Defendant surrendered himself to the police next day.  He was arrested and under caution, he said that he entered into the premises to collect outstanding decoration fees from PW1 and picked up the iron bar in the vicinity for self defense because he knew that there were dogs inside the premises.

7.In mitigation, this Court has been informed that the Defendant has a clear record.  He is now 50 years old.  He came to Hong Kong since 1979.  He is married with 2 teenage children.  He received very little education.  He has worked in the construction business for some time.

8.PW1 engaged him to carry out renovation works in his house which comprises some 10,000 square feet garden and 11,000 square feet living area.

9.It took 6 months to finish the renovation works.  During this period of time, the Defendant had employed some other builders to help him.

10.At the time of the offence, it was just a couple of weeks from the Chinese New Year.  It was the tradition in the construction business to clear the wages for the workers before this festival.

11.The Defendant had no alternative as he would not get in touch with PW1 although the renovation works had been completed for more than 6 months prior to this incident.

12.This is clearly a money dispute matter which should be dealt with in a more civilized manner.  The Defendant should have gone to the Small Claim Tribunal rather than ended up in the criminal court.

13.Having said that, there are still aggravating features in this case, he should not have entered into PW1’s garden in the first place and also carried a metal bar with him.  He knew that PW1 had scolded the security guard for letting him in.  The matter might get out of hand and escalated into violence.

14.However, given the background of the case, the Defendant has a clear record, plead guilty to the charge; I considered that a 100 hour community services order is appropriate in the present case.

15.The Defendant is sentenced to 100 hours Community Service Order. He is required to report to Miss Li on 27.July.2011 at 9am at Room 813 , 8/f, Shatin Government Offices, 1, Sheung Wo Che road, Shatin.