Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Police disciplinary proceedings

Legal area

Court

24 May 2012

CHAU CHEUK YIU v. POON KIT SANG AND OTHERS

Citation

CHAU CHEUK YIU v. POON KIT SANG AND OTHERS
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FACV7/2011

The grant of an extension of time based solely on a subsequent authoritative decision reversing the earlier understanding of law is impermissible absent exceptional circumstances; applying Hung Chan Wa the majority found no exceptional circumstances here (delay, withdrawal of legal aid and judge's advice to abandon were not, cumulatively, exceptional) and the Court of Appeal and Vice‑President erred in law and in exercise of discretion, so the order granting extension was set aside.
20 Jul 2011

TSUI KIN KWOK JOHNNIE v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

Citation

TSUI KIN KWOK JOHNNIE v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV38/2010

Leave to appeal was refused because the proposed grounds either were time‑barred or were fundamentally unarguable; section 6 BORO could not rescue the plaintiff's case by providing an unlimited new cause of action capable of displacing existing procedural rules and limitation requirements, and therefore the application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal was dismissed.
15 Mar 2011

LAM SZE MING AND ANOTHER v. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

Citation

LAM SZE MING AND ANOTHER v. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FAMV26/2010

Leave to appeal out of time was refused because applicants failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances required by the finality principle in HKSAR v Hung Chan-wa, earlier competent courts had considered the fairness complaints and the proper remedy was timely appeal, and the protracted delay undermined the feasibility of any rehearing such that Lam Siu Po did not alter the outcome.
11 Feb 2011

LAM CHI PAN v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

Citation

LAM CHI PAN v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FAMV35/2010

An applicant for judicial review cannot be barred from complaining of an unfair disciplinary hearing on the ground that he failed to request professional legal representation where, under the then-applicable rules, such a request would have had no prospect of success; consequently the absence of a prior request does not automatically preclude an Article 10 challenge.
27 Oct 2010

CHAN WAI KEUNG v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

Citation

CHAN WAI KEUNG v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL196/2002

Because the Adjudicating Officer's hearings were conducted under a regulation imposing an automatic ban on outside legal representation, those hearings were inherently unfair under Lam Siu Po; the Deputy Commissioner’s decision upholding the conviction was therefore unlawful and, absent any convincing evidence that reopening would be detrimental to good administration, the appropriate relief is to quash the disciplinary decisions and permit re-hearing.
19 May 2010

CHAN KANG CHAU v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

Citation

CHAN KANG CHAU v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2824/2004

The application for leave to appeal out of time was refused because the applicant failed to establish the exceptional circumstances required by the authorities (Hung Chan Wa and subsequent guidance); the subsequent overruling of prior authority and arguable merits do not, by themselves, justify extension of time; ex parte A was inapposite.
11 May 2010

WONG CHI KEUNG v. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

Citation

WONG CHI KEUNG v. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1/2010

The court refused extensions of time for all three applications because the applicants did not demonstrate good reason for the long delays (5–8 years); change in the law (Lam Siu Po) and late legal aid grants did not amount to exceptional circumstances sufficient to extend time, and even if good reason existed the court would refuse relief because granting it would be detrimental to good administration given evidence of lost or incomplete records, witness unavailability, resource burdens and risk of a floodgate of reopened disciplinary cases.
11 May 2010

MAK KIN WING v. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

Citation

MAK KIN WING v. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL20/2010

The court refused extensions of time and dismissed the leave applications because the applicants did not establish good reason for the prolonged delays (5–8 years) beyond reliance on Lam Siu Po and legal aid issues, and because granting leave and substantive relief would be detrimental to good administration given incomplete records, unavailable witnesses, operational difficulties and prejudice to the Police Force.
6 May 1998

HKSAR v. HO HO CHUEN

Citation

HKSAR v. HO HO CHUEN
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA63/1998

The Magistrate erred by over‑relying on the breath alcohol reading and failing to consider the full circumstances (first offender status, absence of injuries, attempts to avoid collision, and mitigating effect of pending disciplinary consequences); therefore the suspended custodial sentence was wrong in principle and manifestly excessive and should be substituted with a fine and an 18‑month driving disqualification.