Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Recusal and apparent bias

Legal area

Court

13 Sept 2017

ELIJAH SAATORI v. RAFFLES MEDICAL GROUP (HONG KONG) LTD

Citation

ELIJAH SAATORI v. RAFFLES MEDICAL GROUP (HONG KONG) LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP3224/2016

The Court refused all of the plaintiff's interlocutory applications and renewed leave to appeal because (1) the Judge properly exercised his wide discretion under Order 35 r.3 to adjourn the trial on terms including payment of outstanding taxed costs and payment into court as security; (2) the plaintiff failed to satisfy the Ladd v Marshall criteria for adducing new evidence and the material was irrelevant or unreliable; (3) the recusal/ apparent bias complaints did not meet the objective reasonable apprehension test; (4) the discovery, forensic IT and committal applications were collateral,…
7 Nov 2016

ELIJAH SAATORI v. RAFFLES MEDICAL GROUP (HONG KONG) LTD

Citation

ELIJAH SAATORI v. RAFFLES MEDICAL GROUP (HONG KONG) LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI1114/2006

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed because the proposed grounds lacked a reasonable prospect of success under s14AA(4) of the High Court Ordinance and there was no other reason in the interests of justice to hear the appeal; the adjournment condition and refusal to recuse were upheld and costs were ordered to the defendant.
18 Nov 2010

HKSAR v. CHOI KWOK KEUNG

Citation

HKSAR v. CHOI KWOK KEUNG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA384/2010

The appeal fails because the Magistrate, acting within his discretion, properly evaluated the evidence, rejected the appellant's claim of status and credibility, expressly stated he would consider the forfeiture afresh, and there was no reasonable appearance of bias; therefore there is no basis to interfere with the forfeiture order.
13 Jul 2007

TSUI KOON WAH v. CHIEF JUSTICE AND ANOTHER

Citation

TSUI KOON WAH v. CHIEF JUSTICE AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL75/2007

The application for recusal and leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the allegations against Chung J had already been considered and dismissed by other courts, the asserted factual errors did not constitute deliberate dishonesty or incapacity warranting recusal, case management by Chung J was reasonable and within judicial discretion, and the Chief Judge's administrative direction was lawful; given the repeated, escalating and groundless challenges, the court will consider invoking its inherent jurisdiction to restrict further vexatious applications and adjourned to hear sho…

Hong Kong Case Law

ELIJAH SAATORI v. RAFFLES MEDICAL GROUP (HONG KONG) LTD

ELIJAH SAATORI v. RAFFLES MEDICAL GROUP (HONG KONG) LTD

HKSAR v. CHOI KWOK KEUNG

TSUI KOON WAH v. CHIEF JUSTICE AND ANOTHER