Wong Yi Hao Henry v Public Prosecutor: False Information for Primary School Admission
In Wong Yi Hao Henry v Public Prosecutor, the High Court of Singapore heard an appeal by Wong Yi Hao Henry against a 2-week imprisonment sentence imposed by the lower court for providing false information regarding his residential address when registering his daughter for primary school admission. The High Court, noting the lack of recent sentencing precedents and the absence of aggravating factors, allowed the appeal and substituted the imprisonment sentence with a fine of $5,000.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Appeal allowed; imprisonment sentence substituted with a fine.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Wong Yi Hao Henry appealed against a 2-week imprisonment for providing false information for his daughter's school admission. The High Court substituted the sentence with a $5,000 fine.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wong Yi Hao Henry | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Allowed | Won | Ramesh Tiwary |
| Public Prosecutor | Respondent | Government Agency | Appeal Partially Lost | Partial | Hay Hung Chun, Teo Lu Jia |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| See Kee Oon | Judicial Commissioner | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Ramesh Tiwary | Ramesh Tiwary |
| Hay Hung Chun | Attorney-General's Chambers |
| Teo Lu Jia | Attorney-General's Chambers |
4. Facts
- The appellant provided a false residential address to register his daughter for Primary 1 admission.
- The appellant pleaded guilty to providing false information under s 182 of the Penal Code.
- The lower court sentenced the appellant to 2 weeks' imprisonment.
- The prosecution reviewed its position and did not oppose the appeal for a fine.
- There were no known sentencing precedents since 2007 for similar offences.
- No additional aggravating features were present in the case.
5. Formal Citations
- Wong Yi Hao Henry v Public Prosecutor, Magistrate's Appeal No 9023 of 2015, [2015] SGHC 232
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Judgment issued |
7. Legal Issues
- Appropriateness of custodial sentence for providing false information
- Outcome: The High Court held that a custodial sentence was not warranted in this case and substituted it with a fine.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- PP v Tan Sok Ling (DAC 27101/2007 and others, unreported)
8. Remedies Sought
- Appeal against imprisonment sentence
- Substitution of imprisonment sentence with a fine
9. Cause of Actions
- Providing false information to a public servant
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Appeals
11. Industries
- Education
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PP v Tan Sok Ling | District Court | Yes | PP v Tan Sok Ling (DAC 27101/2007 and others, unreported) | Singapore | Cited as a sentencing precedent for a similar offence, but distinguished due to additional charges faced by the accused in that case. |
| Public Prosecutor v Wong Yi Hao Henry | Singapore Magistrate Court | Yes | [2015] SGMC 7 | Singapore | Cited for the District Judge’s observation on parents risking criminal conviction for school admission. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 182 | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- False information
- Primary 1 admission
- Residential address
- Custodial sentence
- Sentencing precedent
- Deterrent effect
15.2 Keywords
- False information
- Primary school admission
- Penal Code
- Criminal conviction
- Sentencing
- Appeal
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Education Law
17. Areas of Law
- Criminal Law
- Sentencing