25 Mar 2026
香港特別行政區 訴 必高工程有限公司及另一人
- Citation
- [2026] HKCFI 1811
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCMA33/2025
The court accepted the prosecution expert that the fall‑protection arrangement in fact created a real and foreseeable risk (shared/altered lifeline permitting entanglement and interruption of continuous secure anchorage); appellants failed to demonstrate they had taken all reasonably practicable steps (no documented procedures, inadequate supervision, lack of signage and control) and therefore did not satisfy s38H; appellants also lacked a genuine reasonable belief that the system was compliant under common law; convictions were therefore safe and upheld.