Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Spectrum allocation

Legal area

Court

5 Jul 2019

HONG KONG TELECOMMUNICATIONS (HKT) LTD v. SECRETARY FOR COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 1667
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL448/2018

The court dismissed HKT's judicial review: the Secretary and the Communications Authority acted within statutory powers and the SPF in adopting the hybrid administratively‑assigned cum market‑based approach; auction is the default but departure for overriding public policy (service continuity in MTR and territory‑wide 2G) was lawful; para 4.4 SPF did not mandate a refarming cost‑benefit analysis for ordinary expiry reassignment and no Tameside duty arose beyond Wednesbury standards; no substantive legitimate expectation of renewal existed; Special Condition 10.4 was within s7A and aimed at co…
9 Jan 2019

HONG KONG TELECOMMUNICATIONS (HKT) LTD v. SECRETARY FOR COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Citation

[2019] HKCA 44
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP155/2018

The Court held that the duty of candour is tied to the issues before the court as properly identified from the grounds of the Form 86 and is not a licence to fish for unpleaded grounds; specific discovery requires the applicant to show the redacted material is necessary and relevant to the pleaded grounds and for disposing fairly of the case; here the applicant failed to demonstrate necessity or relevance of the redacted parts of the Plum Report to Grounds 2, 3 or 10 and confidentiality and public interest considerations weighed against disclosure, so disclosure was refused and the appeal dis…
9 Jan 2019

HONG KONG TELECOMMUNICATIONS (HKT) LTD v. SECRETARY FOR COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2019] HKCA 44
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV532/2018

The duty of candour does not require disclosure of every document referenced by a decision-maker; disclosure orders for redacted consultant materials require the applicant to identify specific relevance or necessity to the pleaded issues. The appellant failed to show the redacted parts of the Plum Report were necessary to dispose fairly of the pleaded grounds (notably Grounds 2, 3 and 10), and the disclosure sought amounted to a fishing expedition and risked serious commercial prejudice; accordingly the court refused specific discovery and dismissed the appeal and leave application.
3 Oct 2018

HONG KONG TELECOMMUNICATIONS (HKT) LTD v. SECRETARY FOR COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 2224
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL448/2018

The court refused disclosure because the redacted parts were not necessary to decide the pleaded grounds of judicial review, the duty of candour is confined to issues before the court, and the confidentiality and commercial sensitivity of the material outweighed any necessity for disclosure; accordingly the disclosure application was dismissed and costs ordered against the applicant.
24 Aug 2018

HONG KONG TELECOMMUNICATIONS (HKT) LTD v. SECRETARY FOR COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 1976
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL448/2018

Although the Applicant demonstrated a serious issue to be tried, on the balance of convenience and having regard to the public interest and the Authority's specialist assessment that a transitional period of about two years is required for network reconfiguration, the risk of public harm from delaying the reassignment (inability to put auctioned spectrum to immediate use at start of new term) outweighed the Applicant's commercial risks; accordingly interim stay was refused.
27 Apr 2018

HONG KONG TELECOMMUNICATIONS (HKT) LTD v. SECRETARY FOR COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 929
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL448/2018

The court refused to hear the interim stay and disclosure applications on the day due to absence of affidavit evidence and lack of demonstrated urgency, directed the Respondents and Applicant to file evidence within fixed timeframes, declined immediate disclosure of the un‑redacted Plum Report, adjourned the summons for substantive argument and allocated costs accordingly.

Hong Kong Case Law

HONG KONG TELECOMMUNICATIONS (HKT) LTD v. SECRETARY FOR COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND ANOTHER

HONG KONG TELECOMMUNICATIONS (HKT) LTD v. SECRETARY FOR COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

HONG KONG TELECOMMUNICATIONS (HKT) LTD v. SECRETARY FOR COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND ANOTHER

HONG KONG TELECOMMUNICATIONS (HKT) LTD v. SECRETARY FOR COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND ANOTHER

HONG KONG TELECOMMUNICATIONS (HKT) LTD v. SECRETARY FOR COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND ANOTHER

HONG KONG TELECOMMUNICATIONS (HKT) LTD v. SECRETARY FOR COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND ANOTHER