SHUNTAK HOLDINGS LTD & OTHERS v. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

SHUNTAK HOLDINGS LTD & OTHERS v. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

The seized documents were protected by legal professional privilege, that privilege had not been overridden by their circumstances of creation, and the documents did not support allegations of impropriety or a plan to destroy documents; therefore the documents were immune from search and the applicants were entitled to relief in the judicial review proceedings.

Citation
SHUNTAK HOLDINGS LTD & OTHERS v. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
Parties
Plaintiff/applicant: Shun Tak Holdings Limited & Others; Defendant/respondent: The Commissioner of Police
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
29 July 1994
Case Number
HCMP1367/1994
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (order 53, Rule 5, Rsc) / Supplemental Judgment Following Hearing
Outcome
Applicants successful; documents held to be privileged and immune from search; relief in judicial review granted subject to form of order to be determined.
Legal Topics
Legal Professional Privilege, Search and Seizure, Inspection of Documents by Judge, Privilege Waiver, Fraud/illegality Exception
Source Language
EN
Judicial Review Evidence Administrative Law Criminal Procedure Legal Professional Privilege Search and Seizure Inspection of Documents by Judge Privilege Waiver +1 more

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shun Tak Holdings Limited & Others

Plaintiff/applicant

The Commissioner of Police

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (order 53, Rule 5, Rsc) / Supplemental Judgment Following Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the seized documents were protected by legal professional privilege
  2. 2 Whether the circumstances in which documents were created overrode privilege
  3. 3 Whether the documents supported allegations of impropriety or a plan to destroy documents

Ratio Decidendi

The seized documents were protected by legal professional privilege, that privilege had not been overridden by their circumstances of creation, and the documents did not support allegations of impropriety or a plan to destroy documents; therefore the documents were immune from search and the applicants were entitled to relief in the judicial review proceedings.

Court Disposition

Applicants successful; documents held to be privileged and immune from search; relief in judicial review granted subject to form of order to be determined.

Orders

  • Applicants are entitled to the relief sought in the judicial review proceedings.
  • Parties to be heard on the form of order and any consequential matters; hearing to be scheduled.