HKSAR v. FUNG KA MAN AND OTHERS

HKSAR v. FUNG KA MAN AND OTHERS

The application for consolidation was dismissed because the court found insufficient justification to alter settled trial arrangements given the proximity of the trial dates (less than six months away), the potential prejudice and disruption to defendants and counsel, and the absence of compelling reasons to outweigh those considerations; consolidation is a discretionary remedy not warranted on these facts.

Citation
[2022] HKDC 278
Parties
Prosecution: HKSAR; Defendant: HO KA LOK; Defendant: LAU SHEUNG CHI; Defendant: WONG WAN SZE; Defendant: LAI HO PAN; Defendant: KONG PIK YI; Defendant: HUNG CHUNG MUN; Defendant: CHEN HANGSHENG; Defendant: LAU MAN FAI; Defendant: HO PO KWONG SUNNY; Defendant: FUNG KA MAN; Defendant: AU YEUNG CHI KIN CHRISTOPHER; Defendant: KU KA WA; Defendant: LEE TAK HIN; Defendant: CHEUNG HING MAN; Defendant: TAM YU KUEN; Defendant: CHAN SHUE FUNG; Defendant: YAU WAI TO; Defendant: LAM HO SANG; Defendant: LAM YIU CHUN; Defendant: TSE TAT CHI; Defendant: CHAN HOI FUNG
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
1 April 2022
Case Number
DCCC240/2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal — Prosecution Application for Consolidation of Trials / Paper Disposal (ruling on Consolidation Application)
Outcome
Prosecution's application for consolidation dismissed
Legal Topics
Riot, Assault on Police Officer, Possession of Offensive Weapon, Consolidation of Trials, Pre Trial Directions, COVID 19 Public Health Considerations
Source Language
EN
Criminal Law Procedural Law Case Management Riot Assault on Police Officer Possession of Offensive Weapon Consolidation of Trials Pre Trial Directions +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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HKSAR

Prosecution

HO KA LOK

Defendant

LAU SHEUNG CHI

Defendant

WONG WAN SZE

Defendant

LAI HO PAN

Defendant

KONG PIK YI

Defendant

HUNG CHUNG MUN

Defendant

CHEN HANGSHENG

Defendant

LAU MAN FAI

Defendant

HO PO KWONG SUNNY

Defendant

FUNG KA MAN

Defendant

AU YEUNG CHI KIN CHRISTOPHER

Defendant

KU KA WA

Defendant

LEE TAK HIN

Defendant

CHEUNG HING MAN

Defendant

TAM YU KUEN

Defendant

CHAN SHUE FUNG

Defendant

YAU WAI TO

Defendant

LAM HO SANG

Defendant

LAM YIU CHUN

Defendant

TSE TAT CHI

Defendant

CHAN HOI FUNG

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal — Prosecution Application for Consolidation of Trials / Paper Disposal (ruling on Consolidation Application)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the two scheduled trials should be consolidated into a single trial
  2. 2 Whether consolidation would cause unfair prejudice to defendants or unreasonable disruption to counsel diaries
  3. 3 Whether public health risks and increased trial length and costs justify refusal of consolidation

Ratio Decidendi

The application for consolidation was dismissed because the court found insufficient justification to alter settled trial arrangements given the proximity of the trial dates (less than six months away), the potential prejudice and disruption to defendants and counsel, and the absence of compelling reasons to outweigh those considerations; consolidation is a discretionary remedy not warranted on these facts.

Court Disposition

Prosecution's application for consolidation dismissed

Orders

  • Prosecution's application for consolidation dismissed.
  • Trials to proceed separately as currently scheduled.