Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Flagrant incompetence

Legal area

Court

31 Jul 2025

HKSAR v. LAI KAN YAU

Citation

[2025] HKCA 719
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC177/2021

Admissible fresh call records proved the appellant did receive a return call from the deceased and therefore the prosecution's allegation that the appellant lied on that pivotal point constituted a material irregularity affecting his credibility and the safety of the conviction; although defence counsel's conduct was not found to be flagrantly incompetent, the fresh evidence required quashing the murder conviction; the proviso could not sensibly be applied to uphold the conviction and the conviction was quashed and a verdict of acquittal ordered under s.83(3).
23 Oct 2019

HKSAR v. APELETE KOKOU AFLA

Citation

[2019] HKCA 1189
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC176/2017

The Court held that the repeated failure by the applicant's then solicitor and counsel to comply with clear court directions, and the prolonged undue delay in filing required waiver/affirmation and making inquiries of prior trial representatives, amounted to serious professional misconduct/wasted costs under s.18 CCCO; a compensatory order was therefore appropriate and was quantified and equally apportioned between the former counsel and solicitor; the LAD and its officer were not liable. The Court also imposed binding duties on fresh appellate representatives to make independent enquiries, o…
21 May 2018

HKSAR v. LI XIAOXIANG

Citation

[2018] HKCFA 24
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FAMC65/2017

The Court held that counsel's conduct did not amount to flagrant incompetence because the applicant had withdrawn the original frame-up instruction, counsel's tactical choices (abandoning the frame-up defence, focusing on identification reliability, advising against testimony, not pursuing Mr Cheng) were reasonable in context, and the identified errors were immaterial and did not render the trial unfair; therefore the leave application was not reasonably arguable and was dismissed.
15 Feb 2018

HKSAR v. LAM MEI CHING BET

Citation

[2018] HKCA 105
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC24/2015

The application for bail pending appeal is refused because the applicant failed to show the appeal is likely to succeed: the chain of custody was not a live issue at trial and was effectively admitted, the applicant did not meet the high burden to establish flagrant incompetence of counsel that would have undermined the fairness of the trial, and the seriousness of the offence, prior conviction and high likelihood of retrial weighed against granting bail.
3 Mar 2015

RE A Barrister

Citation

RE A Barrister
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL159/2014

Leave to apply for judicial review was granted because the Bar Council's grounds were reasonably arguable: the Tribunal is amenable to judicial review, the Bar Council has standing, and there is a reasonably arguable case that the Tribunal misdirected itself about the scope of counsel's autonomy and failed to consider whether counsel should have obtained instructions or advised the client before deciding not to call potentially exculpatory evidence.
21 Jan 2003

HKSAR v. PAU KAI MING

Citation

HKSAR v. PAU KAI MING
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC206/2002

The applicant was given clear and strong advice by counsel, understood the seriousness, signed a note declining to give evidence as an informed tactical decision, and has failed to prove flagrant incompetence; accordingly the conviction is safe and the application is dismissed, although three months of time served pending the application are not to be reckoned as part of the sentence under s.83W CPO.

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. LAI KAN YAU

HKSAR v. APELETE KOKOU AFLA

HKSAR v. LI XIAOXIANG

HKSAR v. LAM MEI CHING BET

RE A Barrister

HKSAR v. PAU KAI MING