Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Sentencing in disciplinary proceedings

Legal area

Court

7 Jan 2026

RICH ENGINEERING LTD v. FIRE SERVICE INSTALLATION CONTRACTORS DISCIPLINARY BOARD

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 35
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP803/2024

The Board provided adequate reasons and properly reconsidered the totality of sentence in light of convictions set aside; the Board lawfully exercised its discretion on concurrent and consecutive removal orders and the overall removal period fell within the reasonable range of options for disciplinary sanction; the appeal is therefore dismissed and no reduction of the removal order was warranted.
1 Aug 2024

THE LAW SOCIETY OF HONG KONG v. JIM YIU MING AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2024] HKCA 740
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP366/2023

The Court held that applications for leave to appeal under section 13(2A) LPO are to be made to the Court of Appeal and are not subject to the 21-day time limit in s13(1) LPO nor to the 14-day limit in Order 59 r2B(1) (which applies to applications to the court which made the order). There is no statutory time limit for such leave applications to the Court of Appeal; accordingly no extension of time was required for making the leave application. The Court granted leave because it was reasonably arguable that the SDT sentences were inadequate, and extended time for service and filing of the no…
1 Apr 2022

LW v. THE MEDICAL COUNCIL OF HONG KONG

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 734
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1072/2021

The intervention was dismissed: the Confidential Information concerning the Panel's private deliberations is not relevant or necessary to resolve the Applicant's ground alleging failure of "due inquiry" because what was before the Panel and the reasons for its Decision and Sentence are clear from the record; disclosure of in‑camera deliberations is contrary to public interest immunity and would undermine the integrity and candidness of adjudicative processes; the intended intervener is not a proper person to be heard under Order 53 r.5B; accordingly the balance of public interests favours mai…
26 Sept 2018

DR. FUNG YEE LEUNG WILSON v. THE MEDICAL COUNCIL OF HONG KONG

Citation

[2018] HKCA 647
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV35/2017

The application for leave was dismissed because the matters urged were fact-specific and did not raise points of great general or public importance; established principles on adequacy of reasons, appellate review of factual findings, burden of proof and sentencing in professional disciplinary proceedings were adequate and no modification of precedent was required.
22 Dec 2011

DR TO CHUN FUNG ALBERT v. THE MEDICAL COUNCIL OF HONG KONG

Citation

DR TO CHUN FUNG ALBERT v. THE MEDICAL COUNCIL OF HONG KONG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV23/2011

On the totality of admissible evidence the Medical Council rightly found the appellant to be the treating doctor; the Council was entitled to rely on the medical report, MBH staff statements and photographic identifications notwithstanding a non-matching signature and hearsay, mesotherapy injections using phosphatidylcholine constituted use of an unregistered pharmaceutical product and therefore professional misconduct, failure to provide medical records and association with MBH breached professional standards, and procedural complaints did not show unfairness sufficient to overturn findings…
17 Mar 2006

CHUNG WING YIM v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

Citation

CHUNG WING YIM v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV290/2005

The Court held that the FDO and DPC had expressly considered the mitigation on the papers and that, given the seriousness of the appellant's undisclosed indebtedness and lies, their decision to increase the award to compulsory retirement with deferred benefits was within a rational range of disciplinary responses and thus not susceptible to judicial review; appeal dismissed.
9 Mar 2000

CHU LAM WAN v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

Citation

CHU LAM WAN v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL29/1999

The application was dismissed because the FDO and Commissioner provided adequate reasons showing the principal issues were considered; the applicant was given opportunity to address the distinctions drawn and there was no procedural unfairness warranting quashing of the disciplinary decision; judicial review will not substitute the court's view for that of the disciplinary authority absent illegality or lack of fair procedure.
8 Feb 1996

Re KWOK WAI HUNG

Citation

Re KWOK WAI HUNG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP3013/1995

The court held that the Senior Police Officer was entitled to consider the videotape transcript and to draw reasonable inferences from it; the findings about the applicant's integrity and conspiratorial conduct were supportable by the evidence and the dismissal was within the permissible range of penalties and not Wednesbury unreasonable, so the certiorari application was dismissed.