HKSAR v. CHUI KAI FAN

DCCC 578/2025

[2026] HKDC 700

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 578 OF 2025

________________________

________________________

________________________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

________________________

1.  Mr Chui pleaded guilty before me to two charges of Trafficking in a dangerous drug, contrary to section 4(1)(a)  and (3)  of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap 134.

2.  Particulars of Charge 1 are that he, between 9 September 2024 and 12 September 2024, both dates inclusive, at Locker No J03-54, “IN N OUT STORAGE”, Room F, 3^rd Floor, Wah Shun Industrial Building, No 4 Cho Yuen Street, Yau Tong, Kowloon, in Hong Kong, unlawfully trafficked in a dangerous drug, namely, 9,850 grammes of cannabis in herbal form.

3.  Particulars of Charge 2 are that he, between 10 August 2024 and 12 September 2024, both dates inclusive, at Locker No 4097, “REDBOX STORAGE”, 4^th Floor, Well Town Industrial Building, No 13 Ko Fai Road, Yau Tong, Kowloon, in Hong Kong, unlawfully trafficked in a dangerous drug, namely 9,839 grammes of cannabis in herbal form.

Facts admitted by Mr Chui

Charge 1

4.  On 9 September 2024, at about 6:18 am, Mr Chui entered “IN N OUT STORAGE” (“Storage 1”)  located at Room F, 3/F, Wah Shun Industrial Building, Yau Tong, carrying with him a canvas bag (“Canvas Bag 1”).  He placed Canvas Bag 1 into Locker No J03-54 (“Locker 1”)  and left Storage 1.

5.  On 10 September 2024, at about 5 pm, Mr Chui drove a white private car ZJ246 (“the Car”)  from Hing Wah Estate to Wah Shun Industrial Building.  At about 6:12 pm, he went into Storage 1 and stayed there for about 5 minutes.

6.  On 12 September 2024, at about 3:17 pm, Customs officer PW1 intercepted Mr Chui when the latter was walking through the Green Channel at the Arrival Hall of Lok Ma Chau Control Point.  Mr Chui was shown a photo image of the CCTV footage depicting him carrying Canvas Bag 1 at Storage 1 on 9 September 2024. Under caution, Mr Chui said that he was going to Storage 1 at the time, and that he stored dangerous drugs there.

7.  Mr Chui was arrested.  Under caution, Mr Chui stated:

(a)  The dangerous drugs he stored at Wah Shun Industrial Building were for sale; and

(b)  He entered Storage 1 with an access card which he had placed in the Car.

8.  Same day, at about 5:20 pm, after PW1 had seized the access card from the Car, he brought Mr Chui to Storage 1.  At about 6:05 pm, with the password provided by Mr Chui, PW1 unlocked Locker 1 and found the following items inside:

(a)  Canvas Bag 1 containing 8 plastic bags (in 2 layers)  containing a total of 3,920 grammes of cannabis in herbal form;

(b)  A blue insulation box containing 12 plastic bags (in 2 layers)  containing a total of 5,930 grammes of cannabis in herbal form; and

(c)  A blue suitcase containing an impulse sealer, an electronic scale and some “Dog Delights” packaging bags.

9.  At about 6:25 pm, under caution, Mr Chui stated:

(a)  Canvas Bag 1 and the blue insulation box contained cannabis; the blue suitcase contained packing tools; all these items belonged to him; and

(b)  He had rented another locker at “REDBOX STORAGE” (“Storage 2”)  at 4/F, Well Town Industrial Building, Yau Tong (Charge 2).

Charge 2

10.  At about 7:18 pm the same day, PW1 escorted Mr Chui to Storage 2.  With the passwords provided by Mr Chui, they gained entry and unlocked Locker No 4097 (“Locker 2”), where PW1 found the following items:

(a)  A blue insulation box containing 10 plastic bags (in 2 layers)  containing a total of 4,949 grammes of cannabis in herbal form;

(b)  A blue insulation box containing 10 plastic bags (in 2 layers)  containing a total of 4,890 grammes of cannabis in herbal form;

(c)  A carton box containing a blue insulation box containing packing materials; and

(d)  A blue insulation box containing another canvas bag (“Canvas Bag 2”)  and packing materials.

11.  At about 7:20 pm, under caution, Mr Chui admitted that two of the blue insulation boxes contained cannabis.

12.  The CCTV footage of Storage 2 revealed that:

(a)  On 10 August 2024, at about 5:56 am, Mr Chui was carrying a suitcase and was unlocking Locker 2; after about 3 minutes, he locked Locker 2 and left with the suitcase;

(b)  On 23 August 2024, at about 6:56 am, Mr Chui was carrying a suitcase and was unlocking Locker 2; after about 3 minutes, he locked Locker 2 and left with the suitcase;

(c)  On 2 September 2024, at about 9:04 pm, Mr Chui was carrying a suitcase and was unlocking Locker 2; after about 3 minutes, he locked Locker 2 and left with the suitcase;

(d)  On 8 September 2024, at about 6:07 am, Mr Chui was carrying a canvas bag and was unlocking Locker 2; after about 2 minutes, he locked Locker 2 and left with the canvas bag;

(e)  On 9 September 2024, at about 6:37 am, Mr Chui paid a visit to Locker 2; and

(f)  On 10 September 2024, at about 9:38 pm, Mr Chui was unlocking Locker 2; after about one minute, he took a big carton box out of Locker 2 before locking it and leaving Storage 2.

General

13.  The street value of all the cannabis found in this case was about $3.86 million.

14.  Mr Chui now admits that at the material times, he unlawfully trafficked in the herbal cannabis found in this case.

Criminal record

15.  Mr Chui has a clear record.

Antecedents

16.  Mr Chui is aged 33 (32 at the time of the offences), educated to F6 level.  He was working as a construction worker and was earning $17,600 per month.  Mr Chui is married and has a younger brother.

Mitigation

17.  Ms Pauline Leung of counsel assigned by the Director of Legal Aid mitigated on behalf of Mr Chui.  The following is a summary of the mitigation submissions.

18.  Mr Chui’s wife is in court to give him support.

19.  Mr Chui was the elder son of a family of four.  His father passed away in 2009 when he was 18 years old.  As his mother being a housewife and who suffers from deafness, the responsibility of breadwinner of the family fell on Mr Chui.  He therefore quit school to support his mother and his younger brother who was only 11 at the time.  Mr Chui has worked as a waiter, delivery worker, cook, electrician on construction sites.

20.  His last gainful employment before arrest was as a chauffeur.  He had to work long hours on standby.

21.  In 2024, he became married.  After marriage, he resigned from his driving job hoping to find another full-time job with a less demanding work-time.  He could not find one.  His financial situation became critical when he could not keep up with minimum credit card payments.  He resorted to borrowing and accumulated debts in the region of $100,000.  He could not keep up with repayments.  He succumbed to the temptation of making quick money and committed the present offences.  He was promised a monthly income of about $15,000.

22.  The sentencing tariff for trafficking in herbal cannabis was revised by the Court of Appeal in HKSAR v Nguyen Thang Loi [2023] 1 HKLRD 1329 at para 97: for over 9,000 g (and up to 15,000 g), the sentence would be 48 to 66 months; for over 15,000 g (and up to 45,000 g), the sentence would be 66 to 96 months.

23.  The Court of Appeal set out the six-step approach in HKSAR v Herry Jane Yusuph [2021] 1 HKLRD 290.

24.  Ms Leung submitted that the arithmetic starting point for both charges would be about 50.5 months’ imprisonment.

25.  As regards Mr Chui’s role and culpability in the trafficking activities, it was submitted that he merely acted as a storekeeper and courier.  It was submitted that although he admitted to have rented Storage 2 under caution, the leases to the lockers were not signed by him, and he did not know either of the lessees; that he was only given access to the lockers.

26.  It was submitted that the modus operandi of the venture were as follows:

(a)  Mr Chui was asked to be a courier; he did not rent the lockers but was given access to them; he was asked to pick up cannabis from a particular place and to place it at the respective lockers;

(b)  When instructed, he would go to the locker, pick up the drugs and leave it at a designated place in Hong Kong for it to be picked up by others; he was not asked to meet or transact with anyone; and

(c)  Mr Chui did not know where the drugs came from; the other apparatus and items in the lockers were not arranged or bought by him; they were there when he was given access to the lockers.

27.  It was submitted that Mr Chui was seen to have gone to the lockers and no more; that he was not the mastermind of the venture.  It was submitted that there was nothing in the evidence which warrants an upward adjustment of the starting point.

28.  The most significant mitigating factor is Mr Chui’s timely pleas and he should be entitled to the conventional one-third discount.  Ms Leung added that Mr Chui promises the court that he will not re-offend.

29.  The dangerous drug in Charge 2 was only revealed after his arrest for Charge 1.  It was submitted that but for his volunteering of information, Charge 2 might not be revealed.  As such, the court was urged to give some further reduction to Mr Chui’s sentence for Charge 2.

30.  As regards totality, Ms Leung asks that the bulk of the sentences be made to run concurrently.  Alternatively, if a global sentence as in HKSAR v Chong Cho Kit, CACC 363/2005, was deemed applicable[1], for a total weight of cannabis of 19,689 grammes, the notional starting point would be 70.7 months.

31.  It was submitted that the court, in applying the principle of totality, has the discretion to impose a sentence not exceeding the global sentence for the total quantity of drug.

32.  In conclusion, Ms Leung asked for a lenient sentence for Mr Chui.

33.  Ms Leung submitted a total of 3 mitigation letters written in Chinese by respectively Mr Chui himself, his wife, and his younger brother.  The contents generally are that Mr Chui has reflected upon his mistakes and is deeply regretful and will be law-abiding in future.  The letter writers asked for a lenient sentence for Mr Chui so he may reunite with his family earlier.

34.  Ms Leung also submitted a Foundation Certificate of Mr Chui showing he has completed a course in Presentation Software Application whilst on remand.

Sentence

35.  Trafficking in a dangerous drug is a serious offence calling for condign punishment according to the weight of the drug trafficked in.

36.  I shall abide by the six-step sentencing approach as set out in Herry Jane Yusuph (supra).

37.  I shall, under the principle of totality, adopt a global starting point for the two charges despite the fact that the offence periods were not completely overlapping.  Bearing in mind the total weight of the drug and applying the applicable tariff, and taking into account Mr Chui committed two separate and distinct offences at two different places, not one, I adopt 74 months as the initial global starting point.

38.  The evidence was insufficient to show Mr Chui to have played a role more than that of a courier and/or storekeeper.  So, no enhancement of sentence is necessary on this score.

39.  I take on board the submission that the discovery of the offence subject of Charge 2 came about as a result of Mr Chui’s admission.  For this reason, I shall give him a reduction of two months from the starting point before consideration of other mitigating factors.

40.  Mr Chui pleaded guilty to the charges in good time.  He shall be entitled to the customary 1/3 sentencing discount.  There are no other mitigating factors of weight to justify another sentence reduction.

41.  I step back to consider whether the sentence thus resulting is a fair, just and balanced one having regard to the overall circumstances of the case. Given the significant amount of drug found with a value of more than $3.8 million, and the discovery of weighing and packing tools and materials, I am of the view that the sentence is a fair, just and balanced one.

42.  I will impose individual sentences for the two charges and make an appropriate order to arrive at the final global sentence.

(Mr Chui, please stand)

43.  On Charge 1, the sentence is 34 months’ imprisonment.

44.  On Charge 2, the sentence is 33 months’ imprisonment.

45.  I order that 14 months of the sentence on Charge 2 do run consecutively to the sentence on Charge 1, making an aggregate sentence of 48 months’ imprisonment for Mr Chui.