Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Warrant of entry

Legal area

Court

25 Jun 2024

DR LEUNG KAM CHUNG KENNETH v. MS CHEN HIU YIN

Citation

[2024] HKCA 565
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV304/2023

The appeal is dismissed because the Putative Respondent’s decision to apply for a warrant was not amenable to judicial review and, in any event, there was no reasonably arguable public law ground to impugn the magistrate’s lawful exercise of discretion in granting the 2nd Warrant; alleged failures to disclose complainant identity or to organise meetings did not vitiate the process and the applicant failed to identify an arguable error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality.
20 Sept 2023

DR. LEUNG KAM CHUNG KENNETH v. CHEN HIU YIN

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 2359
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1220/2023

The decision to apply for the 2nd warrant was not amenable to judicial review in the circumstances; alternatively, even if amenable, there were no reasonably arguable public law grounds because the respondent had statutory power under s126(2) PHMSO, notice had been given, there were reasonable grounds based on prior investigations and tests, the magistrate did not err in granting the warrant, and there is no statutory obligation to disclose complainant identity or to organise mediation prior to applying for a warrant.
24 Sept 2020

CHOW WAI TAK v. MR LI CHI HO, A MAGISTRATE SITTING AT SHATIN MAGISTRACY AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 2494
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1721/2020

The leave application fails because the applicant did not establish that the magistrate erred or omitted relevant considerations when issuing the warrant under s126(2); the Director acted within statutory powers and Joint Office procedures, the magistrate was entitled to be satisfied on sworn information that entry was refused or apprehended and reasonable grounds existed, and any interference with BOR14 was justified by proportionality; the proposed challenge was not reasonably arguable and has no realistic prospect of success.
18 Nov 2011

THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF GRENVILLE HOUSE v. WONG TAK KEUNG STANLEY AND ANOTHER

Citation

THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF GRENVILLE HOUSE v. WONG TAK KEUNG STANLEY AND ANOTHER
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ2868/2008

The court found on unchallenged evidence that the air grille posed an immediate safety hazard, that the plaintiff validly exercised statutory and contractual powers to enter and replace the grille (s40(1) BMO and DMC provisions), that the warrant of entry was properly obtained and executed, that the costs of $50,885.02 were reasonably incurred in connection with those powers and are recoverable as a civil debt under s40(3) BMO and alternatively under the DMC, and that the management committee's resolutions were valid despite reduced membership and telephone procedure; accordingly judgment was…

Hong Kong Case Law

DR LEUNG KAM CHUNG KENNETH v. MS CHEN HIU YIN

DR. LEUNG KAM CHUNG KENNETH v. CHEN HIU YIN

CHOW WAI TAK v. MR LI CHI HO, A MAGISTRATE SITTING AT SHATIN MAGISTRACY AND ANOTHER

THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF GRENVILLE HOUSE v. WONG TAK KEUNG STANLEY AND ANOTHER