Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Warrant of apprehension

Legal area

Court

10 Jan 1991

RE ENG SUI HANG

Citation

RE ENG SUI HANG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2426/1990

The court held the May and subsequent July orders to proceed and the warrants of apprehension lawful: they were legitimate protective measures to preserve extradition proceedings and prevent flight, contingency in their issuance did not make them unlawful, preexisting authorities (In Re Rees; Oskar) support issuing later orders during earlier proceedings, and the July orders were independent; accordingly detention was lawful and all applications were dismissed.
10 Jan 1991

RE ENG SUI HANG

Citation

RE ENG SUI HANG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2469/1990

Where there was a reasonable basis to consider making subsequent orders necessary, no vexation or oppression and an intention to act within the law, orders to proceed and warrants issued during or before the conclusion of habeas corpus proceedings were lawful; the May warrant and subsequent July orders were valid, the July orders were independently effective, the applicant's detention was lawful and all applications were dismissed.
10 Jan 1991

RE ENG SUI HANG

Citation

RE ENG SUI HANG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2641/1990

Orders to proceed and warrants issued during the pendency of habeas corpus proceedings were lawful where there was a reasonable basis, no vexation or oppression, and an intention to act in conformity with the law as declared by the court; contingency alone does not render such orders invalid; the May and subsequent July orders and warrants were lawful and the applicant's detention was lawful; applications dismissed (following Rees and Oskar).

Hong Kong Case Law

RE ENG SUI HANG

RE ENG SUI HANG

RE ENG SUI HANG