HKSAR v. LAU TING SING JEROME

CACC279/2012

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 279 OF 2012

(ON APPEAL FROM DCCC NO. 1072 OF 2011)

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

_______________

DECISION

_______________

1. The Applicant was convicted on one count of indecent assault and two counts of criminal intimidation. He was sentenced a total of 17 months’ imprisonment on the 16 June 2012. The Applicant applies for bail pending appeal. Bail pending appeal is normally only granted if it appears prima facie that the appeal is likely to be successful or where there is a risk that the sentence or a substantial part of it would have been served by the time the appeal is heard.

2. I am told that the Applicant has been in custody since the 29 May 2012 and up to date has been in custody for four months and 12 days.  Given the usual one third reduction for good behavior, he can expect to be released on the 6 May 2013.  Unfortunately, the state of the Court’s diary is such, that the appeal is unlikely to be heard before the end of April.  The consequence is that by the time of appeal is heard, he would have served most if not all of his sentence.

3. Applicant has applied for leave to appeal against both conviction and sentence.  His application for bail is put on the basis, first, the application for leave to appeal is likely to be successful and secondly on the basis that by the time the appeal is heard, he would have served most if not all of his sentence. 

4. Mr Michael Blanchflower SC has informed me that it does not matter whether bail is granted on one ground or the other. Obviously, what is important is that he attains the objective, namely, bail pending appeal. 

5. Thus, it is not necessary for me to consider whether the appeal is likely to be successful and I express no view on that at all.  That must await the determination by the Court of Appeal in due course. 

5.         So far as bail on the time basis is concerned, as I said, bail may be granted if there is risk that the sentence or a substantial part of it would have been served by time the appeal is heard. Since on the projected time table for the hearing on appeal, by the time the appeal is heard, he would have been served practically the entirely of the sentence. Fairness requires that he should be given bail pending appeal, otherwise his appeal would have been rendered much less meaningful.[1] So I would grant bail.