由此 -7- A B C 15. Smith was referred to in HKSAR v Cheung Kwan-kit & Ors [2002] 4 HKG 506, where Lugar-Mawson J decided what soliciting meant A B C in terms of section 147(l)(a). He held that soliciting was no more than any D E F G act (even a passive one) or words, or a combination of acts and words, indicating that a man or woman was prepared to prostitute him or herself. 16. He found too that the section did not require that the person to whom the indication was made found it welcome or unwelcome. On that D E F G basis the alternative ground in the Appellant’s first Perfected Ground of H H Appeal, cannot be sustained. I I 17. J K In HKSAR v Cen Zhi Cheng [2008] HKLRD 96, McMahon J J considered and agreed with the definition of soliciting in Cheung Kwan-kit. He noted too that it was possible to solicit by simply standing in a K particular location at a certain time. He referred to the apposite definition L M of “solicit” in the Shorter Oxford dictionary; this would appear to involve an individual seeking to obtain something, or some response from another, or to persuade another to do something. N O P 18. In Cen Zhi Cheng, the court noted that section 147(l)(a) did not distinguish between male and female; nor did anything limit its L M N O P application to specific categories of person. The person who effected the Q R original solicitation did not necessarily continue to be confined to the role of “solicit-or”. During discussion or negotiation, the person who was Q R initially the object of the soliciting (“the solicit-ee”) might become the S solicit-or; each case had to be considered on its own facts. S T T U U V V