HKSAR v. CHAN YIU SHING AND OTHERS

HKSAR v. CHAN YIU SHING AND OTHERS

The court concluded that where published material creates a substantial risk of prejudice to the fairness of a criminal trial the media must be warned and restrained; accordingly the court issued a warning prohibiting publication of anything likely to create a substantial risk of prejudice to HCCC 41/2016, directed that the media not report the Direction during the proceedings, warned of the risk of contempt proceedings, and granted leave to serve the Direction on the Facebook operator to mitigate prejudicial pre-trial publicity.

Citation
[2018] HKCFI 307
Parties
Prosecution: HKSAR; 1st Defendant: CHAN Yiu-shing; 2nd Defendant: CHENG Wai-shing; 3rd Defendant: PENNELLI Rizzy; 4th Defendant: WU Kai-fu; 5th Defendant: MAN Ting-lock
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
9 February 2017
Case Number
HCCC41/2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Pre Trial Directions Hearing (media Reporting)
Outcome
Court issued a formal warning and directions to the media restricting publication likely to prejudice the trial; granted leave to serve the Direction on a social media operator; noted adjournment of trial to mitigate prejudice.
Legal Topics
Pre Trial Publicity, Reporting Restrictions, Contempt Proceedings, Fair Trial Rights
Source Language
EN
Media Law Criminal Procedure Constitutional Law (basic Law) Contempt of Court Pre Trial Publicity Reporting Restrictions Contempt Proceedings Fair Trial Rights

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HKSAR

Prosecution

CHAN Yiu-shing

1st Defendant

CHENG Wai-shing

2nd Defendant

PENNELLI Rizzy

3rd Defendant

WU Kai-fu

4th Defendant

MAN Ting-lock

5th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Pre Trial Directions Hearing (media Reporting)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether published media material contained inaccuracies or prejudicial content that risks unfair trial
  2. 2 Whether the court should issue a direction restricting media publication and prohibit reporting of the direction itself
  3. 3 Scope of restraint on press freedom under Basic Law and Hong Kong Bill of Rights where publicity prejudices administration of justice

Ratio Decidendi

The court concluded that where published material creates a substantial risk of prejudice to the fairness of a criminal trial the media must be warned and restrained; accordingly the court issued a warning prohibiting publication of anything likely to create a substantial risk of prejudice to HCCC 41/2016, directed that the media not report the Direction during the proceedings, warned of the risk of contempt proceedings, and granted leave to serve the Direction on the Facebook operator to mitigate prejudicial pre-trial publicity.

Court Disposition

Court issued a formal warning and directions to the media restricting publication likely to prejudice the trial; granted leave to serve the Direction on a social media operator; noted adjournment of trial to mitigate prejudice.

Orders

  • Warning issued that media must not publish anything which might create a substantial risk of prejudice to the fairness of trial HCCC 41/2016
  • Media directed not to report this matter and this Direction during the currency of these proceedings