THE QUEEN v. ALEXANDER LAU

THE QUEEN v. ALEXANDER LAU

The court held that confidential communications in question fall within the class potentially protected by public interest privilege but that the privilege is subject to a balancing test against the public interest in the administration of justice; in this case the public interest in confidentiality outweighed the prosecution interest because the communications were of marginal and remote significance to the issues, so disclosure was not ordered.

Citation
THE QUEEN v. ALEXANDER LAU
Parties
Prosecution: The Queen; Accused: Alexander Lau
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
25 March 1982
Case Number
DCCC298/1981
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence (pre Trial)
Outcome
Objection upheld; communications not admitted or ordered disclosed
Legal Topics
Public Interest Privilege, Admissibility of Evidence, Misconduct in Public Office, Attempt to Pervert the Course of Public Justice, Judicial Service Confidentiality
Source Language
EN
Criminal Law Evidence Public Law Judicial Administration Public Interest Privilege Admissibility of Evidence Misconduct in Public Office Attempt to Pervert the Course of Public Justice +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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Queen

Prosecution

Alexander Lau

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence (pre Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether confidential communications between public officers attract a public interest privilege against disclosure
  2. 2 Whether that public interest privilege can be outweighed by the competing public interest in the proper administration of justice (prosecution of serious offences)
  3. 3 Whether the Judicial Service Commission Ordinance (Cap. 92) and s.11 prohibit disclosure in these proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that confidential communications in question fall within the class potentially protected by public interest privilege but that the privilege is subject to a balancing test against the public interest in the administration of justice; in this case the public interest in confidentiality outweighed the prosecution interest because the communications were of marginal and remote significance to the issues, so disclosure was not ordered.

Court Disposition

Objection upheld; communications not admitted or ordered disclosed

Orders

  • Objection to admission of communications between the accused and the Chief Justice and Registrar upheld; those communications shall not be disclosed in these proceedings