Hong Kong Judgment

Court of Final Appeal

MOK KIN KAU v. HKSAR

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

Leave to appeal was granted because it was reasonably arguable that a third trial in the circumstances would constitute a departure from accepted norms and cause substantial and grave injustice to the accused, engaging s.32(2).

Court disposition

Leave to appeal granted under the substantial and grave injustice limb of s.32(2)

Orders

  • Leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal granted
  • Hearing of appeal fixed for 17 January 2008

02

Material facts

Parties

MOK KIN KAU

Applicant Counsel: Mr Andrew Bruce SC (instructed by Messrs Y L Yeung & Co.)

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

Respondent Counsel: Mr Simon Tam (of the Department of Justice)

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Miscellaneous Proceedings (criminal) Application for Leave to Appeal From HCMA No.1161 of 2006 / Determination on Application for Leave to Appeal

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
Applicant argued that, given the history, a third trial would likely cause substantial and grave injustice and disadvantage to the accused and that the court should grant leave to appeal under the s.32(2) limb.
Respondent
Respondent opposed leave to appeal and maintained that a retrial was appropriate and that the circumstances did not establish substantial and grave injustice warranting leave.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Court's determination

    Proceedings should be brought to a conclusion without undue delay as a fundamental feature of the criminal justice system

  2. 02

    s.32(2) of the Court's statute

    Leave to appeal may be granted under the substantial and grave injustice limb where further trial would result in prejudice to the accused

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

Leave to appeal was granted because it was reasonably arguable that a third trial in the circumstances would constitute a departure from accepted norms and cause substantial and grave injustice to the accused, engaging s.32(2).

Obiter and limits

  • Bringing matters to a conclusion without undue delay is an important feature of our criminal justice system.
  • A third trial in circumstances like these can, in principle, constitute a departure from accepted norms to an accused person's disadvantage.

Court disposition

Leave to appeal granted under the substantial and grave injustice limb of s.32(2)

  • Leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal granted
  • Hearing of appeal fixed for 17 January 2008

Source and reliance status

Court of Final Appeal · 6 November 2007

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

Court of Final Appeal

Judgment· 6 November 2007

MOK KIN KAU v. HKSAR

bjbj FAMC No. 51 of 2007

IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 51 OF 2007 (CRIMINAL) (ON APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL FROM HCMA NO. 1161 OF 2006) _____ Between:

MOK KIN KAU Applicant - and -

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION Respondent _____ Appeal Committee : Mr Justice Bokhary PJ, Mr Justice Chan PJ and Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ Date of Hearing : 6 November 2007 Date of Determination : 6 November 2007

D E T E R M I N A T I O N Mr Justice Bokhary PJ : Bringing matters to a conclusion without undue delay is an important feature of our criminal justice system. It is reasonably arguable that a third trial in circumstances like these would constitute a departure from accepted norms to an accused person s disadvantage. We grant the applicant leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal under the substantial and grave injustice limb of s.32(2) of the Court s statute. [Hearing of appeal fixed for 17 January 2008.] (Kemal Bokhary) (Patrick Chan) (RAV Ribeiro) Permanent Judge Permanent Judge Permanent Judge Mr Andrew Bruce SC (instructed by Messrs Y L Yeung & Co.) for the applicant Mr Simon Tam (of the Department of Justice) for the respondent

PAGE -

PAGE - &`#$ Normal.dot setup Microsoft Word 9.0 Title Microsoft Word Document MSWordDoc Word.Document.8

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

s.32(2) of the Court's statute

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.