HKSAR v. CHEUNG CHUN YUEN BARRY

HKSAR v. CHEUNG CHUN YUEN BARRY

Applying the objective fair‑minded and informed observer test, the judge found no firmly established real possibility of bias arising from his prior conduct at the co‑defendant's plea; however, because the prosecution subsequently joined the defence application and to avoid further delay and costs, the judge granted leave to recuse himself and vacated and refixed the trial dates.

Citation
[2019] HKDC 889
Parties
Prosecution: HKSAR; Defendant (d1): Cheung Chun Yuen Barry 張震遠
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
24 June 2019
Case Number
DCCC718/2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Application for Recusal (pre Trial)
Outcome
Application for recusal granted (leave to recuse); trial judge recused and trial dates vacated and refixed
Legal Topics
Apparent Bias, Subconscious Bias, Recusal, Cooperation With Prosecution, Trial Listing and Adjournment
Source Language
EN
Criminal Law Judicial Recusal Court Procedure Apparent Bias Subconscious Bias Recusal Cooperation With Prosecution Trial Listing and Adjournment

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HKSAR

Prosecution

Cheung Chun Yuen Barry 張震遠

Defendant (d1)

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Application for Recusal (pre Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge's prior conduct in relation to co-defendant's plea and encouragement to cooperate gives rise to a real possibility of bias warranting recusal
  2. 2 Whether the concept of 'subconscious bias' is a viable ground for recusal in criminal trials
  3. 3 Which legal test applies for apparent bias (fair-minded and informed observer)

Ratio Decidendi

Applying the objective fair‑minded and informed observer test, the judge found no firmly established real possibility of bias arising from his prior conduct at the co‑defendant's plea; however, because the prosecution subsequently joined the defence application and to avoid further delay and costs, the judge granted leave to recuse himself and vacated and refixed the trial dates.

Court Disposition

Application for recusal granted (leave to recuse); trial judge recused and trial dates vacated and refixed

Orders

  • Grant leave to the joint application for recusal; judge recused from hearing D1's trial
  • Original trial dates vacated; trial refixed provisionally from 7 January 2020 to 19 February 2020 with 30 days reserved, to commence 7 January 2020 at 9:30am unless parties show special reason