Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Disciplinary inquiry procedure

Legal area

Court

14 Sept 2006

TSO TAK KEUNG, EDDY v. SECRETARY FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE AND ANOTHER

Citation

TSO TAK KEUNG, EDDY v. SECRETARY FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL28/2005

The application for judicial review was dismissed because charge (a) in the disciplinary inquiry raised an additional material issue (unauthorised access under the Standing Order) not tried in the criminal count so section 15/autrefois acquit did not bar the disciplinary charge; the Inquiry Committee was not bound by criminal evidentiary exclusions under section 8 of the Public Service (Disciplinary) Regulation so admission of videotaped interviews was permissible for weight and did not amount to abuse of process or double jeopardy; issue estoppel was inapplicable because the employer was not…
26 Jan 2006

DR IP KAY LO VINCENT v. THE HONG KONG MEDICAL COUNCIL

Citation

DR IP KAY LO VINCENT v. THE HONG KONG MEDICAL COUNCIL
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV278/2005

The appeal was dismissed because the Council properly declined to admit and rely on the Kohs' statements in the absence of cross-examination, there was insufficient evidence to prove the charges, and regulation 23(3) did not entitle the defendant to adduce evidence to fill gaps where the prosecuting case was not made out; the inherent jurisdiction argument was inapplicable.
23 Jul 1998

DR CHEUNG SAU YI v. THE MEDICAL COUNCIL OF HONG KONG

Citation

DR CHEUNG SAU YI v. THE MEDICAL COUNCIL OF HONG KONG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL16/1998

The court held that regulation 15 authorises a referral back to the PIC for further consideration of fresh information and that a failure to comply strictly with regulation 11(6) does not automatically invalidate subsequent lawful proceedings where section 21 contemplates substantial rather than literal compliance, no prejudice to the applicant is shown and the broadened allegation is capable of amounting to professional misconduct; accordingly the PIC's December 1997 referral was lawful and the judicial review failed.
19 Jul 1996

JOHN HO HUNG CHIU AND ANOTHER v. THE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG

Citation

JOHN HO HUNG CHIU AND ANOTHER v. THE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV9/1996

The Committee owed a limited duty of fairness — to give sufficient notice of issues and an opportunity to present evidence — but this did not extend to providing appellants with a draft report or a pre-finalisation opportunity to rebut criticisms where they were merely witnesses/prosecutors in an inquiry into another's conduct; there was no error of law and the appropriate remedy for gratuitous defamatory criticism is an action for defamation since such reports have only qualified privilege unless defeated by malice or unjustified wider publication.
15 Apr 1992

LAM KWOK LEUNG v. THE MEDICAL COUNCIL OF HONG KONG

Citation

LAM KWOK LEUNG v. THE MEDICAL COUNCIL OF HONG KONG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV206/1991

The Court held that the Medical Council had before it ample and credible documentary and trial evidence to find the doctor guilty of professional misconduct, the legal adviser's advice that the civil standard (applied flexibly) was correct, and that no grounds for appellate interference (error of law, procedural unfairness, or findings unsupported by evidence) were shown; appeal dismissed.

Hong Kong Case Law

TSO TAK KEUNG, EDDY v. SECRETARY FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE AND ANOTHER

DR IP KAY LO VINCENT v. THE HONG KONG MEDICAL COUNCIL

DR CHEUNG SAU YI v. THE MEDICAL COUNCIL OF HONG KONG

JOHN HO HUNG CHIU AND ANOTHER v. THE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG

LAM KWOK LEUNG v. THE MEDICAL COUNCIL OF HONG KONG