Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Sentencing for contempt

Legal area

Court

6 Mar 2026

嘉信大廈業主立案法團 v. 張笑媚

Citation

[2026] HKCA 312
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP216/2024

Section 50 of the High Court Ordinance governs appeals in contempt matters from the Lands Tribunal so no leave was required; this Court exercised its power to extend time under Lands Tribunal Rules r30D, heard the appeal on its merits, upheld the Judge’s factual findings that the respondent intentionally retained IO documents and committed contempt beyond reasonable doubt, and held the custodial sentence was not wrong in principle; costs awarded to applicant on indemnity basis at HK$124,000.
6 Mar 2026

嘉信大廈業主立案法團 v. 張笑媚

Citation

[2026] HKCA 312
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV33/2026

Section 50 of the High Court Ordinance applies to appeals from the Lands Tribunal in contempt cases so no leave was required; on the evidence the only reasonable and irresistible inference was that the respondent remained in control, custody or possession of the IO documents and properties and intentionally disobeyed the Delivery Up Order, therefore contempt was proved beyond reasonable doubt; the sentencing exercise was not wrong in principle and the custodial sentence was justified; costs awarded on indemnity basis.
10 Oct 2025

CREATE TOGETHER TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD v. KONG HOK FUNG

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4965
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2295/2024

The Defendant committed deliberate breaches of the Mareva injunction by intentionally causing withdrawals and transfers from Welltec accounts while the injunction was in force; he admitted contempt; mitigation was limited to admission and apology; immediate custodial sentence is justified and appropriate; Defendant sentenced to 2 months' imprisonment and ordered to pay the Plaintiff's costs assessed at HK$500,000 payable within 28 days.
25 Apr 2025

LCH v. WPSN

Citation

[2025] HKCA 376
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV327/2024

The Court of Appeal held the wife validly prosecuted committal proceedings under Order 52 RHC; undertakings to pay contained in the Children Finance Order are enforceable as orders; the Judge did not err in refusing to hear the variation application first because the undisputed facts (and the husband’s failure to give evidence) meant any variation hearing would not have affected the finding of contempt; the suspended eight‑week sentence conditioned on payment (including sums falling due after the specific arrears) was lawful; the husband was properly found in contempt beyond reasonable doubt;…
20 May 2024

LO PO WAI, HARRY v. WONG YEE CHUK

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 1434
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1444/2022

Contempt for non-compliance with disclosure orders was established; the defendant's conduct was reckless and highly culpable though not contumaciously intentional; imprisonment was not appropriate; a fine of HK$150,000 was proportionate; payment within 28 days; defendant to bear 75% of costs on an indemnity basis.
20 Dec 2023

YU QUAN LI AND ANOTHER v. SUEN KIN WING

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 109
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP633/2019

Defendant received concurrent immediate custodial sentences of six months on each count because the breaches of the freezing injunction and disclosure order were deliberate, intentional and wilful, could not be purged (assignment irreversible and no disclosure offered), caused real prejudice to the plaintiffs and did not justify suspension of imprisonment.
16 Nov 2023

WONG CHI HUNG 對 TAO KIN LUN, the Manager of NAM TI TAI TSUNG (藍地大眾)

Citation

[2023] HKDC 1571
Court

District Court
Case number

DCMP3584/2023

Applying the established three‑stage test, the court found the orders' meaning was clear, photographic evidence proved the defendant had not commenced the remedial works beyond reasonable doubt and the defendant offered no credible excuse or evidence of having taken steps to comply; therefore the defendant was guilty of contempt and a custodial sentence of 3 months (with 28 days suspended) was appropriate to punish and secure compliance.
22 Aug 2023

CARTIER INTERNATIONAL AG AND OTHERS v. DYNASTY JEWELRY (HONG KONG) LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2023] HKCA 1002
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV232/2021

The Court upheld the trial judge's findings that the defendants were in contempt for failing to comply with the recipient disclosure orders because the defendants themselves admitted (by WhatsApp, in-person statements and photographs) undisclosed sales; the manufacturing allegation was not proven beyond reasonable doubt; the supplier disclosure breach necessarily followed from the proved recipient breaches; the sentences and indemnity costs were appropriate and remained undisturbed.
14 Aug 2023

SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. CHEUNG CHI HO

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 2104
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP598/2022

The Defendant committed civil contempt by intentionally breaching the Incitement Injunction through two widely accessible online comments that incited the bombing of a judicial officer and his family; the deliberate, public and aggravating nature of the conduct and the Defendant's absconding and lack of remorse warranted an immediate custodial sentence of four months and an order that costs be paid to the Secretary for Justice on the indemnity basis, to be summarily assessed.
14 Apr 2023

SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. YIP SIN MAN

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 983
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP539/2022

The defendant committed contempt by publishing personal data in breach of the Police Doxxing Injunction and by encouraging dissemination; however, balancing aggravating and mitigating factors (brief duration of the post and removal, youth, low culpability relative to most serious cases, financial hardship and delay in prosecution) warranted a custodial sentence of 21 days which should be suspended for 12 months, together with an order to pay a contribution to the SJ's costs of HK$30,000.