R. v. TANG KIU CHUNG

IN THE HIGH COURT

1994, No. 736
Magistracy Appeal

___________

_________________

J U D G M E N T

_________________

Litton, V.-P.:

1. This is an appeal against sentence only. The appellant is aged 41 years. He faced one charge before Mr Kelly at the Western Magistracy on 2 July 1994 and was convicted after trial. The charge was the offence of assault occasioning actual bodily harm. The crime occurred on 24 March 1994 at the 2/F office of the Western Wholesale Market in Hong Kong.

2. The person assaulted, one Li Yuk-tung, was a colleague of the appellant. They were at that time both working as security guards. The day before the assault took place there was some trifling dispute between the parties concerning a chair. The next day, 24 March 1994, whilst the victim was eating his breakfast sitting down, the appellant without warning punched him in the right eye. This caused bleeding.

3. The magistrate took the view that the assault was premeditated and deliberate and that the appellant could not be said to have acted in the heat of the moment. The magistrate gave credit to the appellant for his clear record. The appellant is a married man with three children. Taking into account all the relevant circumstances the magistrate imposed on the appellant a fine of $2,750, costs of $750 and ordered him to pay compensation in the sum of $1,000.

4. The appellant has not in this court expressed grievance concerning the level of the fine as such, but said that it was unfair that he should now carry a criminal conviction record. That is a legal consequence of the fact of conviction, over which this court has no control. There are no grounds of appeal against sentence and the appeal is dismissed.