Attorney General v Yip Kai Foon, UKPC 4 (High Court of Hong Kong 7 December 1987).
cnn.com
www-cgi.cnn.com
Gee, Alison Dakota (31 May 1996). "'Teeth Dog' Meets his Match". Asiaweek. Archived from the original on 18 October 2006. Retrieved 12 December 2014.
doj.gov.hk
Yip Kai-foon v HKSAR, 1 HKLRD (Court of Appeal 1998) ("The judge fully comprehended the nature of the material, acknowledged that it was potentially damaging material but was satisfied that that potential could be set at naught if a sufficient warning was given. He gave a properly emphatic warning. In exercising his discretion the judge did not take into account any matters which he should not have considered, nor did he fail to consider matters which he should have considered, and he was neither plainly wrong as to the law or in his reasoning. There was no basis for interfering with the judge’s refusal to stay.").
HKSAR v Yip Kai Foon, 1 HKLRD 277 (Court of Appeal 1999) ("The overall sentence of 40 years and 3 months called for adjustment in accordance with the totality principle. The totality was excessive and the sentence could be varied to one of 36 years and 3 months. That would be achieved by ordering that the overall sentence of 29 years imposed on the two indictments should start to run four years prior to the expiration of the sentence which the Applicant was serving at the time when the later sentences were imposed.").
Yip Kai-foon v HKSAR, 3 HKCFAR 31 (Appeal Committee of the Court of Final Appeal 2000) ("Although the injuries suffered by the Applicant were very serious, the offences were very grave and he suffered his injuries in a gun battle between his gang and the police. Although no police officers or members of the public were injured they were put to terrible risk. The actions of the Applicant and his gang came very close, as the Court of Appeal rightly stated, to declaring war on society and ‘a court would be failing in its duty to the public if it did not impose heavy deterrent sentences in circumstances such as this’.").
