區域法院（刑事）Deputy District Judge M Chow7/10/2025[2025] HKDC 1647
DCCC421/2024
A A
B B
DCCC 421/2024
C [2025] HKDC 1647 C
D D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
E HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION E
CRIMINAL CASE NO 421 OF 2024
F F
G ------------------------------------------- G
HKSAR
H H
v
I LAU CHUNG LONG NICHOLAS I
-------------------------------------------
J J
K Before: Deputy District Judge M Chow in Court (Open to Public) K
Date: 8 October 2025
L L
Present: Mr Christoper T. M. WONG, counsel-on-fiat, for
M HKSAR/Director of Public Prosecutions M
Mr Stewart W. C. HAU, instructed by James W L Li & Co,
N N
assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the defendant
O Offence: [1] Wounding with intent（有意圖而傷人） O
P
[2] Failing to surrender to custody without reasonable cause P
（無合理因由而沒有按照法庭的指定歸押）
Q Q
R ----------------------------------------- R
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
S S
-----------------------------------------
T T
U U
V V
-2-
A A
B B
1. The Defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of wounding with
C intent, contrary to section 17(a) of the Offences against the Person C
Ordinance, Cap. 212 and a charge of failing to surrender to custody without
D D
reasonable cause, contrary to section 9L(1) and (3) of the Criminal
E Procedure Ordinance, Cap. 221. E
F F
Summary of Facts
G G
2. On 23 September 2023, PW1, PW2 and PW3 were having
H H
dinner in a restaurant. The Defendant had dinner with his friends at that
I same time. I
J J
3. At about 0000 hours, the Defendant and PW2 had some
K quarrels outside the toilet. K
L 4. Ten minutes later, the Defendant suddenly approached PW2’s L
table and shouted at PW2 with foul language. The restaurant owner (PW4)
M M
separated them. The Defendant then went to G/F of the restaurant.
N N
O
5. About 20 minutes later, PW1 to PW3 met the Defendant O
outside the restaurant again. The Defendant shouted at PW1. PW2 pushed
P P
the Defendant away. PW4 tried to stop the dispute, but was unsuccessful.
Q The Defendant got emotional and rushed back to the restaurant and Q
returned with a cleaver (30 cm long) in his right hand, tried to chop towards
R R
PW1’s head. PW1 raised his left arm and was slashed on the left arm near
S to the elbow. PW2 stopped the Defendant and the cleaver fell on the S
ground.
T T
U U
V V
-3-
A A
B B
C C
6. Medical report of PW1:
D D
E (1) PW1 suffered an 8 cm laceration over the left elbow; E
F F
(2) an emergency operation was performed on the same
G day; G
H H
(3) a 2.5 cm metal shard was found to be partially
I embedded in the proximal ulna with a 2 cm incomplete I
fracture line. There was an 80% cut of the anconeus
J J
muscle bulk and one cm laceration of the inferior part
K of the joint capsule. K
L L
7. PW1 was given sick leave from 24 September 2023 to 11
M October 2023. On 27 September 2023, PW1 told the police that he would M
not receive further medical treatment in Hong Kong after he returned to
N N
Mainland. Up to now, the police could not contact PW1 anymore.
O O
8. The Defendant was arrested at the scene.
P P
Q 9. In the cautioned record of interview, the Defendant stated Q
that:
R R
S (a) At the material time, he had a dispute (over the use of S
toilet) with an unknown man in the restaurant;
T T
U U
V V
-4-
A A
B B
(b) When he saw the unknown man again outside the
C restaurant, he was emotional and intoxicated. He C
grabbed a cleaver and chopped PW1 on the left arm
D D
near to elbow with it.
E E
Charge 2
F F
G 10. On 2 July 2024, the Defendant failed to appear in the District G
Court. A warrant of arrest was issued.
H H
I 11. On 24 August 2024, the Defendant was located and rearrested. I
Under caution, the Defendant stated that he forgot to attend court on 2 July
J J
2024 and he did not know what to do afterwards.
K K
Background of the Defendant
L L
M 12. He is 31 years of age, divorced in July 2024, previously M
worked as a casual worker with a monthly earning of about $10,000. He
N N
lives with his father (68), his mother has passed away.
O O
13. He has a clear record.
P P
Q Sentence Q
R R
14. Wounding with intent carries a maximum sentence of life
S imprisonment. S
T T
U U
V V
-5-
A A
B B
15. The defence accepts that there is no sentencing guideline for
C this offence, but quoted the Court of Appeal case of Secretary of Justice vs C
1
Hau Ping Chuen which stated that the usual sentencing range is between
D D
3 to 12 years.
E E
16. There are a number of sentencing factors to be considered as
F F
stated in HKSAR v Chan Chun Tat2.
G G
17. In the present case:-
H H
I (a) The Defendant acted alone and the attack was not I
premeditated.
J J
K (b) The victim and the Defendant did not know each other. K
It just happened that they were having dinner in the
L L
same restaurant.
M M
(c) 30 minutes before the attack, the defendant had a
N N
dispute with PW2 over the use of the toilet.
O O
(d) Later on, the Defendant went to PW2’s table to shout
P P
at him with foul language. In fact, what the Defendant
Q did in such circumstance was already inflammatory. Q
The restaurant owner separated them, clearly was to
R R
avoid an out of control situation.
S S
T T
1
Secretary of Justice vs Hau Ping Chuen [2008] 4 HKLRD 673
2
HKSAR v Chan Chun Tat (CACC 317/2012, 11 April 2013)
U U
V V
-6-
A A
B B
(e) When both sides finished their meals, they met again
C outside the restaurant. The Defendant shouted at PW1 C
again, PW2 pushed him away. At this point, the
D D
situation escalated as the Defendant went into the
E restaurant to grab a cleaver to attack PW1. E
F F
(f) The cleaver was about 30 cm long. It turned into an
G offensive weapon as it was lethal. G
H H
(g) The Defendant had been drinking. As he stated under
I caution, he was intoxicated at the material time. His I
emotion was out of control and became in a rage to
J J
loose his temper. The defence submitted that his act at
K the material time was impulsive and out of his character K
as he did not have record of violence.
L L
M (h) The Defendant aimed at the head of the victim who M
raised his left arm to protect himself and to prevent the
N N
chopping onto his head.
O O
(i) The level of force, no doubt , was great as 2.5 cm metal
P P
shard was found in the left elbow of the victim.
Q Q
(j) The victim suffered lacerations over his left elbow area,
R R
emergency operation was performed on the same day
S after his admission into the hospital. S
T T
U U
V V
-7-
A A
B B
(k) There is no evidence to suggest that the victim suffers
C a permanent injury. C
D D
(l) The victim seemed to have put this matter behind him
E as the police could not get in touch with him. E
F F
18. Having considered all the factors above, I accept that a
G starting point of 3 years for Charge 1 is appropriate to reflect the culpability G
of the Defendant and the gravity of the offence.
H H
I 19. As such, given 1/3 discount for his guilty plea, the sentence is I
reduced to 2 years.
J J
K Charge 2 K
L L
20. The Defendant failed to surrender to court in July 2024. He
M was rearrested within 2 months. M
N N
21. He said under caution that he forgot the hearing date and did
O not know what to do afterwards. O
P P
22. Any right minded person will outrightly reject his claim as it
Q is not a common matter that a clear record person needs to attend Court on Q
an appointed day. On the contrary, he purposely absent from attending the
R R
court on the previous hearing day was to avoid serving the sentence.
S S
23. I take 4.5 months as the starting point, reduce to 3 months
T T
after 1/3 discount.
U U
V V
-8-
A A
B B
C C
D D
Totality
E E
24. Charge 1: 2 years
F F
Charge 2: 3 months
G G
I order 2 months from Charge 2 to run consecutively to
H H
Charge 1, the final sentence arrives at 2 years and 2 months.
I I
25. The Defendant is ordered to serve a period of 2 years and 2
J J
months imprisonment.
K K
L L
M ( M Chow ) M
Deputy District Judge
N N
O O
P P
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V
DCCC421/2024 HKSAR v LAU CHUNG LONG NICHOLAS - LawHero
引用 Secretary of Justice vs Hau Ping Chuen [2008] 4 HKLRD 673 確立 wounding with intent 的一般量刑範圍（3-12年），以及 HKSAR v Chan Chun Tat (CACC 317/2012) 關於量刑因素的分析。
### 案件基本資料
- 案件名稱：HKSAR v Lau Chung Long Nicholas
- 法院：區域法院 (District Court)
- 法官：M Chow
- 判決日期：2025年10月8日
### 案情摘要
被告在餐廳與一名男子（PW2）因使用洗手間而起爭執。隨後被告在餐廳外再次與PW1及PW2發生衝突，在情緒失控且處於醉酒狀態下，被告返回餐廳拿了一把30厘米長的菜刀，企圖砍向PW1的頭部。PW1舉臂擋截，導致左肘嚴重受傷，需進行緊急手術。此外，被告在2024年7月未能按照法庭指定日期出庭，直到8月被重新逮捕。
### 核心法律爭議
本案涉及兩項罪名：第一是根據《侵害身體條例》第17(a)條的「有意圖而傷人」；第二是根據《刑事程序條例》第9L(1)及(3)條的「無合理因由而沒有按照法庭的指定歸押」。核心爭議在於如何根據罪行嚴重程度（gravity）及被告的責任程度（culpability）決定適當的 sentence。
### 判決理由
法官分析 wounding with intent 的 sentencing factors 時，考慮到被告單獨行動且非 premeditated，但使用了致命武器且目標為頭部，暴力程度高。雖然被告醉酒且無前科，但其行為具有煽動性。法官引用 precedent 確定此類罪行的通常量刑範圍為3至12年，並將起點定為3年。對於未能出庭一項，法官拒絕了被告「忘記日期」的辯解，認為其目的是為了逃避刑罰。
### 引用案例與條文
引用 Secretary of Justice vs Hau Ping Chuen [2008] 4 HKLRD 673 確立 wounding with intent 的一般量刑範圍（3-12年），以及 HKSAR v Chan Chun Tat (CACC 317/2012) 關於量刑因素的分析。
### 裁決與命令
被告對兩項罪名均 mengaku guilty。第一項罪名原定3年，經 1/3 guilty plea 折扣後為2年；第二項罪名原定4.5個月，折扣後為3個月。法官根據 totality 原則，裁定第二項罪名中有2個月需連續執行，最終總刑期為 2年2個月監禁。
---
### 免責聲明
本摘要由人工智能自動生成，內容可能存在錯誤或遺漏，僅供參考，不構成法律意見。如需法律建議，請諮詢合資格律師。### Case Details
- Case Name: HKSAR v Lau Chung Long Nicholas
- Court: District Court
- Judge: M Chow
- Date of Judgment: 8 October 2025
### Factual Background
The Defendant had a dispute with a man (PW2) over toilet usage at a restaurant. Following a subsequent confrontation outside, the intoxicated Defendant retrieved a 30cm cleaver and attempted to chop PW1's head. PW1 blocked the attack with his arm, sustaining a severe laceration and bone fracture to the left elbow requiring emergency surgery. Additionally, the Defendant failed to appear in court on 2 July 2024 and was rearrested in August.
### Key Legal Issues
The case involved two charges: (1) wounding with intent under s.17(a) of the Offences against the Person Ordinance, and (2) failing to surrender to custody under s.9L(1) and (3) of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance. The primary issue was determining the appropriate sentence based on the gravity of the attack and the defendant's culpability.
### Ratio Decidendi
The judge analyzed the sentencing factors, noting that while the attack was not premeditated and the defendant had no prior record, the use of a lethal weapon aimed at the head indicated high culpability. Intoxication did not mitigate the inflammatory nature of the act. For the second charge, the judge rejected the defendant's claim of 'forgetting' the court date, concluding it was a deliberate attempt to avoid sentencing.
### Key Precedents & Statutes
Secretary of Justice vs Hau Ping Chuen [2008] 4 HKLRD 673 was cited to establish the usual sentencing range for wounding with intent (3 to 12 years). HKSAR v Chan Chun Tat (CACC 317/2012) was used to identify relevant sentencing factors.
### Decision & Orders
The Defendant pleaded guilty to both charges. For Charge 1, the starting point of 3 years was reduced to 2 years after a 1/3 discount. For Charge 2, 4.5 months was reduced to 3 months. Applying the principle of totality, the judge ordered 2 months of the second sentence to run consecutively, resulting in a final sentence of 2 years and 2 months imprisonment.
---
### Disclaimer
This summary is AI-generated and may contain errors or omissions. It is for reference only and does not constitute legal advice. Please consult a qualified lawyer for professional legal advice.
A A
B B
DCCC 421/2024
C [2025] HKDC 1647 C
D D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
E HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION E
CRIMINAL CASE NO 421 OF 2024
F F
G ------------------------------------------- G
HKSAR
H H
v
I LAU CHUNG LONG NICHOLAS I
-------------------------------------------
J J
K Before: Deputy District Judge M Chow in Court (Open to Public) K
Date: 8 October 2025
L L
Present: Mr Christoper T. M. WONG, counsel-on-fiat, for
M HKSAR/Director of Public Prosecutions M
Mr Stewart W. C. HAU, instructed by James W L Li & Co,
N N
assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the defendant
O Offence: [1] Wounding with intent（有意圖而傷人） O
P
[2] Failing to surrender to custody without reasonable cause P
（無合理因由而沒有按照法庭的指定歸押）
Q Q
R ----------------------------------------- R
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
S S
-----------------------------------------
T T
U U
V V
-2-
A A
B B
1. The Defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of wounding with
C intent, contrary to section 17(a) of the Offences against the Person C
Ordinance, Cap. 212 and a charge of failing to surrender to custody without
D D
reasonable cause, contrary to section 9L(1) and (3) of the Criminal
E Procedure Ordinance, Cap. 221. E
F F
Summary of Facts
G G
2. On 23 September 2023, PW1, PW2 and PW3 were having
H H
dinner in a restaurant. The Defendant had dinner with his friends at that
I same time. I
J J
3. At about 0000 hours, the Defendant and PW2 had some
K quarrels outside the toilet. K
L 4. Ten minutes later, the Defendant suddenly approached PW2’s L
table and shouted at PW2 with foul language. The restaurant owner (PW4)
M M
separated them. The Defendant then went to G/F of the restaurant.
N N
O
5. About 20 minutes later, PW1 to PW3 met the Defendant O
outside the restaurant again. The Defendant shouted at PW1. PW2 pushed
P P
the Defendant away. PW4 tried to stop the dispute, but was unsuccessful.
Q The Defendant got emotional and rushed back to the restaurant and Q
returned with a cleaver (30 cm long) in his right hand, tried to chop towards
R R
PW1’s head. PW1 raised his left arm and was slashed on the left arm near
S to the elbow. PW2 stopped the Defendant and the cleaver fell on the S
ground.
T T
U U
V V
-3-
A A
B B
C C
6. Medical report of PW1:
D D
E (1) PW1 suffered an 8 cm laceration over the left elbow; E
F F
(2) an emergency operation was performed on the same
G day; G
H H
(3) a 2.5 cm metal shard was found to be partially
I embedded in the proximal ulna with a 2 cm incomplete I
fracture line. There was an 80% cut of the anconeus
J J
muscle bulk and one cm laceration of the inferior part
K of the joint capsule. K
L L
7. PW1 was given sick leave from 24 September 2023 to 11
M October 2023. On 27 September 2023, PW1 told the police that he would M
not receive further medical treatment in Hong Kong after he returned to
N N
Mainland. Up to now, the police could not contact PW1 anymore.
O O
8. The Defendant was arrested at the scene.
P P
Q 9. In the cautioned record of interview, the Defendant stated Q
that:
R R
S (a) At the material time, he had a dispute (over the use of S
toilet) with an unknown man in the restaurant;
T T
U U
V V
-4-
A A
B B
(b) When he saw the unknown man again outside the
C restaurant, he was emotional and intoxicated. He C
grabbed a cleaver and chopped PW1 on the left arm
D D
near to elbow with it.
E E
Charge 2
F F
G 10. On 2 July 2024, the Defendant failed to appear in the District G
Court. A warrant of arrest was issued.
H H
I 11. On 24 August 2024, the Defendant was located and rearrested. I
Under caution, the Defendant stated that he forgot to attend court on 2 July
J J
2024 and he did not know what to do afterwards.
K K
Background of the Defendant
L L
M 12. He is 31 years of age, divorced in July 2024, previously M
worked as a casual worker with a monthly earning of about $10,000. He
N N
lives with his father (68), his mother has passed away.
O O
13. He has a clear record.
P P
Q Sentence Q
R R
14. Wounding with intent carries a maximum sentence of life
S imprisonment. S
T T
U U
V V
-5-
A A
B B
15. The defence accepts that there is no sentencing guideline for
C this offence, but quoted the Court of Appeal case of Secretary of Justice vs C
1
Hau Ping Chuen which stated that the usual sentencing range is between
D D
3 to 12 years.
E E
16. There are a number of sentencing factors to be considered as
F F
stated in HKSAR v Chan Chun Tat2.
G G
17. In the present case:-
H H
I (a) The Defendant acted alone and the attack was not I
premeditated.
J J
K (b) The victim and the Defendant did not know each other. K
It just happened that they were having dinner in the
L L
same restaurant.
M M
(c) 30 minutes before the attack, the defendant had a
N N
dispute with PW2 over the use of the toilet.
O O
(d) Later on, the Defendant went to PW2’s table to shout
P P
at him with foul language. In fact, what the Defendant
Q did in such circumstance was already inflammatory. Q
The restaurant owner separated them, clearly was to
R R
avoid an out of control situation.
S S
T T
1
Secretary of Justice vs Hau Ping Chuen [2008] 4 HKLRD 673
2
HKSAR v Chan Chun Tat (CACC 317/2012, 11 April 2013)
U U
V V
-6-
A A
B B
(e) When both sides finished their meals, they met again
C outside the restaurant. The Defendant shouted at PW1 C
again, PW2 pushed him away. At this point, the
D D
situation escalated as the Defendant went into the
E restaurant to grab a cleaver to attack PW1. E
F F
(f) The cleaver was about 30 cm long. It turned into an
G offensive weapon as it was lethal. G
H H
(g) The Defendant had been drinking. As he stated under
I caution, he was intoxicated at the material time. His I
emotion was out of control and became in a rage to
J J
loose his temper. The defence submitted that his act at
K the material time was impulsive and out of his character K
as he did not have record of violence.
L L
M (h) The Defendant aimed at the head of the victim who M
raised his left arm to protect himself and to prevent the
N N
chopping onto his head.
O O
(i) The level of force, no doubt , was great as 2.5 cm metal
P P
shard was found in the left elbow of the victim.
Q Q
(j) The victim suffered lacerations over his left elbow area,
R R
emergency operation was performed on the same day
S after his admission into the hospital. S
T T
U U
V V
-7-
A A
B B
(k) There is no evidence to suggest that the victim suffers
C a permanent injury. C
D D
(l) The victim seemed to have put this matter behind him
E as the police could not get in touch with him. E
F F
18. Having considered all the factors above, I accept that a
G starting point of 3 years for Charge 1 is appropriate to reflect the culpability G
of the Defendant and the gravity of the offence.
H H
I 19. As such, given 1/3 discount for his guilty plea, the sentence is I
reduced to 2 years.
J J
K Charge 2 K
L L
20. The Defendant failed to surrender to court in July 2024. He
M was rearrested within 2 months. M
N N
21. He said under caution that he forgot the hearing date and did
O not know what to do afterwards. O
P P
22. Any right minded person will outrightly reject his claim as it
Q is not a common matter that a clear record person needs to attend Court on Q
an appointed day. On the contrary, he purposely absent from attending the
R R
court on the previous hearing day was to avoid serving the sentence.
S S
23. I take 4.5 months as the starting point, reduce to 3 months
T T
after 1/3 discount.
U U
V V
-8-
A A
B B
C C
D D
Totality
E E
24. Charge 1: 2 years
F F
Charge 2: 3 months
G G
I order 2 months from Charge 2 to run consecutively to
H H
Charge 1, the final sentence arrives at 2 years and 2 months.
I I
25. The Defendant is ordered to serve a period of 2 years and 2
J J
months imprisonment.
K K
L L
M ( M Chow ) M
Deputy District Judge
N N
O O
P P
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V