Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Civil service regulations

Legal area

Court

20 Sept 2022

HO SHUN MIU v. DIRECTOR OF BROADCASTING AND OTHERS

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 2894
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL260/2022

Leave to apply for judicial review dismissed because the primary decisions (appraisal reports, PSC advice and non-renewal) were in substance private employment matters not amenable to judicial review, the applicant was substantially delayed in challenging the earlier decisions and the proposed grounds were not reasonably arguable on the merits; the SCS dismissal of representations under PSAO was also not reviewable on public law grounds in the circumstances.
8 Sept 2009

WONG KEI KWONG v. PRINCIPAL ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE AND ANOTHER

Citation

WONG KEI KWONG v. PRINCIPAL ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FAMV26/2009

Section 15 does not bar the disciplinary proceedings because the disciplinary charge did not raise substantially the same issues as the criminal charges: the criminal charges required proof of an intention to deceive under the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance while the disciplinary charge under CSR 852(5) required only that the officer improperly received the allowance, a matter that can be established without intent; therefore there was no double jeopardy and the application for leave to appeal was dismissed.
2 Mar 2006

HKSAR v. CHAN PUI TONG

Citation

HKSAR v. CHAN PUI TONG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA1139/2005

The conviction was unsafe because the magistrate treated contractual non‑entitlement and failure to disclose as per se dishonest without sufficiently considering context, evidence of an honest belief or intention to remedy the situation, and the realistic expectation that the bank would notify the employer; the prosecution failed to exclude an honest explanation beyond reasonable doubt for the periods in question, so the finding of dishonesty could not be sustained.
7 Jun 2004

LI CHI KEUNG, ALVIN v. SECRETARY FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE AND ANOTHER

Citation

LI CHI KEUNG, ALVIN v. SECRETARY FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL14/2004

The Director and the Secretary acted within the lawful parameters of the HFS and the Civil Service Regulations: disposal of the HFS property without acquisition of a replacement within the prescribed six-month break-in period (absent exceptional prior approval) resulted in forfeiture and deemed exit from the scheme; the decision-makers lawfully exercised their discretion and the differential treatment vis-à-vis other housing benefits did not amount to unlawful discrimination; application dismissed.
9 Feb 2004

CHENG HO KEE AND OTHERS v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE

Citation

CHENG HO KEE AND OTHERS v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA16883/1999

The judge held that overnight on call is an inherent requirement of CSD employment and, in terms of the CSRs, correctly classified as on-call under CSR 669 rather than as stand duty under CSR 668; accordingly plaintiffs were not entitled to overtime/time off in lieu and their breach of contract claims fail.
19 Nov 1987

LAU HON CHEONG AND ANOTHER v. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

Citation

LAU HON CHEONG AND ANOTHER v. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV95/1987

The Establishment Secretary's memorandum granted the Director of Public Works a discrete power to 'decide' which stand-by times were to be exempted, which amounted to an unlawful delegation of the Secretary's power under the C.S.R.s; therefore the Director's circulars purporting to exclude the plaintiffs from overtime entitlement under the C.S.R.s were invalid and the plaintiffs were entitled to overtime under the relevant C.S.R.s.
28 Mar 1985

RE FONG HIN WAH

Citation

RE FONG HIN WAH
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP135/1985

The court held there is no automatic right to legal representation at the informal disciplinary inquiry governed by the Disciplinary Proceedings Regulations; the Committee acted within its procedural powers, the evidence supported the findings and they were not Wednesbury unreasonable, and the disparities between charges and findings did not render the proceedings unfair such as to warrant quashing; application for certiorari dismissed and costs awarded to the Attorney General.
28 Nov 1980

LAW YUK-MING AND OTHERS v. ATTORNEY GENERAL

Citation

LAW YUK-MING AND OTHERS v. ATTORNEY GENERAL
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV44/1980

The Court held that Article XVI of the Hong Kong Letters Patent empowers the Governor to suspend public officers and that such suspension can include suspension without pay; Colonial Regulations are subordinate instructions binding the Governor but do not form part of officers' contracts; Government Regulations (including C.S.Rs) are incorporated into contracts of service and, given the express contractual reservation permitting unilateral variation, C.S.R.611 validly became a term of service on promulgation and did not conflict with Colonial Regulations; consequently the appellants' declarat…