AU KAM HAN AND ANOTHER v. AU KAM MING AND ANOTHER
The appeal was dismissed: the Master’s order for disclosure of police forensic reports, post‑mortem reports, scene photographs/sketches/maps and records of interviews and arrests should stand subject to editing/redaction to protect the identity of suspects at large; public interest immunity as claimed was insufficient to withhold disclosure in whole; defendants cannot shield such documents by claiming legal professional privilege or a proprietary interest; issues of admissibility are for trial, not for the disclosure stage; costs on indemnity basis were awarded to the plaintiffs and to the Secretary for Justice.
- Citation
- AU KAM HAN AND ANOTHER v. AU KAM MING AND ANOTHER
- Parties
- Plaintiff (personal Representative of the Estate of LEUNG PUI Hong): AU KAM HAN; Plaintiff (personal Representative of the Estate of LEUNG PUI Hong): LEUNG SAI HOI; 1st Defendant (appellant): AU KAM MING; 2nd Defendant (appellant): KEUNG WAN PING; Non Party (represented on Behalf of the Commissioner of Police): Secretary for Justice
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Jurisdiction
- Hong Kong
- Judgment Date
- 11 April 2000
- Case Number
- HCPI1069/1998
- Procedural Posture
- Personal Injuries Action (civil Claim Arising From Alleged Killing; Application for Disclosure Against Non‑party Secretary for Justice) / Appeal From Master's Disclosure Order to the High Court (judgment on Appeal)
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Disclosure of Police Records, Public Interest Immunity (pii) Claims, Legal Professional Privilege, Records of Interview, Relevance and Admissibility of Evidence, Costs Assessment and Indemnity Costs
- Source Language
- EN
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
AU KAM HAN
Plaintiff (personal Representative of the Estate of LEUNG PUI Hong)
LEUNG SAI HOI
Plaintiff (personal Representative of the Estate of LEUNG PUI Hong)
AU KAM MING
1st Defendant (appellant)
KEUNG WAN PING
2nd Defendant (appellant)
Secretary for Justice
Non Party (represented on Behalf of the Commissioner of Police)
Procedural Posture
Personal Injuries Action (civil Claim Arising From Alleged Killing; Application for Disclosure Against Non‑party Secretary for Justice) / Appeal From Master's Disclosure Order to the High Court (judgment on Appeal)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether forensic reports prepared as part of a police investigation must be disclosed to plaintiffs in related civil proceedings
- 2 Whether post‑mortem reports, scene photographs/sketches/maps should be disclosed
- 3 Whether records of interviews and arrests (including defendants' statements) are discoverable in civil proceedings
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal was dismissed: the Master’s order for disclosure of police forensic reports, post‑mortem reports, scene photographs/sketches/maps and records of interviews and arrests should stand subject to editing/redaction to protect the identity of suspects at large; public interest immunity as claimed was insufficient to withhold disclosure in whole; defendants cannot shield such documents by claiming legal professional privilege or a proprietary interest; issues of admissibility are for trial, not for the disclosure stage; costs on indemnity basis were awarded to the plaintiffs and to the Secretary for Justice.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed with costs
- Order for disclosure of: forensic reports produced in the police investigation; post‑mortem reports of the deceased; photographs, sketches and maps of the scene where the body was found; records of interviews and arrests of the defendants and other suspects (subject to editing to protect identity of suspects at...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment