Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Emergency regulations

Legal area

Court

21 Dec 2020

KWOK WING HANG AND 23 OTHERS v. CHIEF EXECUTIVE IN COUNCIL AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2020] HKCFA 42
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FACV7/2020

The Court held the ERO is constitutionally valid: it authorises the CE in Council to make subsidiary emergency regulations but does not impermissibly delegate core legislative power because the power is subject to judicial review, LegCo scrutiny (negative vetting and amendment) and Basic Law constraints (including HKBORO/ICCPR protections). Applying a four-step proportionality test to the PFCR, the prohibition in section 3 (including subsections (1)(b),(c),(d) when read against the POO categories) pursues legitimate aims of deterring violence and facilitating law enforcement, is rationally co…
21 Dec 2020

CHIEF EXECUTIVE IN COUNCIL AND ANOTHER v. KWOK WING HANG AND 23 OTHERS

Citation

[2020] HKCFA 42
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FACV9/2020

The ERO does not impermissibly delegate general legislative power to the Chief Executive in Council; regulations made under it are subordinate emergency regulations subject to judicial, legislative and constitutional control. The PFCR pursues legitimate aims (deterrence of criminality and facilitation of law enforcement), is rationally connected to those aims and section 3 (prohibiting facial coverings likely to prevent identification at unlawful assemblies, unauthorized assemblies, public meetings and public processions) is a proportionate and necessary restriction on protected rights; secti…
22 Mar 1968

WONG MING CHUN t/a TAI TAK SCHOOL v. CHEN HSUN YU AND OTHERS

Citation

WONG MING CHUN t/a TAI TAK SCHOOL v. CHEN HSUN YU AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1343/1967

Amendment of the plaintiff's name to show a sole proprietorship was permitted as a curable irregularity, but on the merits the publications were not shown to libel the plaintiff individually: 'leftist' and allegation of possession of sharpened iron bars were not defamatory in ordinary meaning, and plaintiff failed to plead particulars or adduce evidence to support the extended innuendos; accordingly judgment for defendants with costs.

Hong Kong Case Law

KWOK WING HANG AND 23 OTHERS v. CHIEF EXECUTIVE IN COUNCIL AND ANOTHER

CHIEF EXECUTIVE IN COUNCIL AND ANOTHER v. KWOK WING HANG AND 23 OTHERS

WONG MING CHUN t/a TAI TAK SCHOOL v. CHEN HSUN YU AND OTHERS