香港特別行政區 訴 秦錦釗及另五人

香港特別行政區 訴 秦錦釗及另五人

The court found no evidence of private communications or bias by the costs assessor, held the applicant's allegations were unparticularised and unsupported (phone records not produced), concluded the assessor acted reasonably within case management discretion, and dismissed the application to disqualify; costs were awarded to the prosecution.

Citation
[2021] HKDC 1536
Parties
Plaintiff (payer): 香港特別行政區; First Defendant (payee): 秦錦釗; Second Defendant: 陳潔貞; Third Defendant: 林雅茵; Fourth Defendant: 秦礎成; Fifth Defendant: 侯宗慈; Sixth Defendant: 傅朝華
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
21 December 2021
Case Number
DCCC919/2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal Costs Assessment / Interlocutory Costs Assessment Hearing; Application to Disqualify Costs Assessor
Outcome
Application to disqualify costs assessor dismissed; applicant ordered to pay prosecution's costs
Legal Topics
Recusal, Apparent Bias, Costs Assessment, Case Management
Source Language
CH
Criminal Procedure Costs and Taxation Judicial Conduct Recusal Apparent Bias Costs Assessment Case Management

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 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

香港特別行政區

Plaintiff (payer)

秦錦釗

First Defendant (payee)

陳潔貞

Second Defendant

林雅茵

Third Defendant

秦礎成

Fourth Defendant

侯宗慈

Fifth Defendant

傅朝華

Sixth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Costs Assessment / Interlocutory Costs Assessment Hearing; Application to Disqualify Costs Assessor

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the costs assessor should be disqualified for actual, presumed or apparent bias
  2. 2 Whether there was improper private communication between the court and the prosecution
  3. 3 Whether prior costs orders in the same matter bind other proceedings or affect impartiality

Ratio Decidendi

The court found no evidence of private communications or bias by the costs assessor, held the applicant's allegations were unparticularised and unsupported (phone records not produced), concluded the assessor acted reasonably within case management discretion, and dismissed the application to disqualify; costs were awarded to the prosecution.

Court Disposition

Application to disqualify costs assessor dismissed; applicant ordered to pay prosecution's costs

Orders

  • Application to disqualify the costs assessor dismissed
  • First defendant to pay the prosecution's costs of this application, including a senior counsel certificate