28 Jul 2025
Defendant was properly served, the plaintiffs' surveyor report establishes continued non-compliance with the injunction, and under Order 45 rule 8 the court is empowered to authorize the plaintiffs to effect remedial works at the defendant's cost; consequently leave to enter and carry out works and orders for payment of costs are warranted.
24 Nov 2022
Despite significant and largely unexplained delay, leave to apply for committal was granted because on the material before the court there was a prima facie case that could not be said to have no prospect of success, the delay did not demonstrably cause such prejudice as to require refusal of leave, and the proper impact of delay was more appropriately addressed at the substantive hearing rather than by refusing leave at the ex parte stage.
17 Jan 2019
Because Wing Ming was in default, filed late evidence and failed to show that longer periods were necessary, and because the structural and expert evidence established the works were limited and largely within the minor works regime, the court accepted the Incorporated Owners' proposed time limits and imposed 66 days for the external walls and 265 days for the Part Loft.
27 Dec 2018
The sentence of 4 months imprisonment was anomalous and disproportionate when compared with sentences in the series of related 'minibus' contempt cases; the judge erred in treating the appellant as effectively an organiser like Cheng based on the elevated platform evidence, and parity required reduction, so the appeal was allowed and the custodial sentence quashed and substituted to permit immediate release.
31 Aug 2018
Each respondent, having been a party to the injunction and having remained in the area after repeated clear announcements and warnings in circumstances where their presence was calculated to and did delay or frustrate the bailiffs and police in executing the injunction, possessed the requisite mens rea and committed criminal contempt; clearance was not complete until the plaintiff's agents were satisfied and the mere removal of major obstructions did not absolve respondents of the obligation to leave.
31 Aug 2018
Each respondent, being a person subject to the injunction, deliberately remained in the Area after multiple announcements and warnings, and by so doing obstructed and interfered with bailiffs and police executing the injunction; pursuant to Wong Ho Ming the requisite mens rea is established by intent to do the obstructing acts, and accordingly each respondent was guilty of criminal contempt.
31 Aug 2018
Each respondent, being within the class of persons restrained by the injunction, after repeated announcements and warnings, remained in the Area and by their presence and conduct materially obstructed or impeded the bailiffs and police executing the injunction; the requisite actus reus and mens rea were established and each respondent is guilty of criminal contempt.
31 Aug 2018
Where persons against whom an injunction is directed knowingly remained in the prohibited area after repeated announcements and warnings and their presence and conduct materially obstructed bailiffs and police executing the injunction, they committed criminal contempt; mens rea is established by intent to do the obstructing acts and need not be a specific intent to obstruct the administration of justice.
23 Mar 2018
For a party bound by a court order, deliberately remaining and engaging in conduct that is inherently likely to obstruct or interfere with a bailiff executing that order constitutes criminal contempt; proof that the contemnor intended to perform the obstructive acts (basic intent) suffices and no separate specific intent to interfere with the administration of justice is required; prior warning is not a prerequisite to establishing actus reus in such cases.
17 Jan 2018
S109A of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance does not apply because the Court of First Instance was not exercising its criminal jurisdiction in these contempt proceedings; sentencing was therefore governed by contempt sentencing principles: assess each respondent's role and conduct, impose immediate imprisonment for leading obstructive conduct (Wong Chi Fung 3 months; Wong Ho Ming 4 months 15 days) and suspended terms with fines for lesser/non-violent participants, with mitigation considered (age, role, financial hardship, cooperation).