Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Certification to court of final appeal under s32

Legal area

Court

29 Nov 2019

HKSAR v. TONG PO-HIN

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 2899
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA393/2018

The court held that s52(3)(a) criminalises driving with the subjective purpose of carrying passengers for hire or reward (mens rea element) but does not require actual payment or a formal/direct agreement between driver and passenger; the 'carriage' targeted is predominantly commercial in character; on that basis and having regard to authority and the certification test under s32(2), the proposed points (including overbreadth and Article 33 claims) were not reasonably arguable and certification was refused.
9 Sept 2011

HKSAR v. SZETO WAH AND OTHERS

Citation

HKSAR v. SZETO WAH AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA164/2011

The court declined to permit the appellants to raise the first point of law in the appeal, determined that the constitutionality issue was of great and general importance and granted a section 32 certificate to the Court of Final Appeal on the two stated points of law, and refused to set aside the costs order, ordering it to be made absolute.
17 Jun 2008

RE LU DAYONG

Citation

RE LU DAYONG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV139/2008

The court held that applications for judicial review challenging a trial judge's refusal to grant a permanent stay for deliberate breach of legal professional privilege are not categorically impermissible but are fact‑sensitive; no threshold higher than the arguability test was adopted; because judicial review is a remedy of last resort and satellite litigation in criminal cases is only acceptable in highly exceptional circumstances, the facts here did not justify collateral challenge and the court refused to certify the questions under section 32.
24 Nov 2005

YEUNG CHUN PONG v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE

Citation

YEUNG CHUN PONG v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV102/2005

The Court held the matter arose in a criminal cause or matter so the criminal jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal was engaged; accordingly the Court certified two questions under s32 of the Court of Final Appeal Ordinance for determination by the Court of Final Appeal, namely whether magistrates have jurisdiction in committal proceedings to entertain autrefois/double jeopardy pleas (a question the Court had earlier concluded magistrates did not have jurisdiction to decide).

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. TONG PO-HIN

HKSAR v. SZETO WAH AND OTHERS

RE LU DAYONG

YEUNG CHUN PONG v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE