Lam, Johnson Man Hon 林文瀚
HKSAR v Chan Chun Kit
| Summary Offences Ordinance s17
HK Court of Final Appeal, 15-Jul-2022
No thought crimes: in an encouraging sign that the highest HK court (but not the courts below) are robustly pushing back against overreaching prosecutions, the CFA unanimously overturns the Court of Appeal and Magistrate and rules that because cable ties are not manufactured for the purpose of restraining a person, they are outside the scope of the Summary Offences Ordinance, and the defendant's conviction is overturned. Applying the prosecution's wide interpretation would "do violence to the language" and "effectively turn the section into a thought crime" - Chief Justice Andrew Cheung Kui Nung.
HK Court of Final Appeal, 15-Jul-2022
No thought crimes: in an encouraging sign that the highest HK court (but not the courts below) are robustly pushing back against overreaching prosecutions, the CFA unanimously overturns the Court of Appeal and Magistrate and rules that because cable ties are not manufactured for the purpose of restraining a person, they are outside the scope of the Summary Offences Ordinance, and the defendant's conviction is overturned. Applying the prosecution's wide interpretation would "do violence to the language" and "effectively turn the section into a thought crime" - Chief Justice Andrew Cheung Kui Nung.
Long Hair wins final appeal on prison haircuts
| Justice is blind, except for haircuts
HK Court of Final Appeal, 27-Nov-2020
The top court unanimously overturns the Court of Appeal's unanimous judgment by (soon to be Chief Justice) Andrew Cheung, Johnson Lam and Jeremy Poon. Male prisoners were not given the same choice as female prisoners over their hair length, and that was sex discrimination. See our article of 1-May-2018 analysing the CA's faulty judgment. First Instance Justice Thomas Au Hing Cheung (now a CA judge) is vindicated.
HK Court of Final Appeal, 27-Nov-2020
The top court unanimously overturns the Court of Appeal's unanimous judgment by (soon to be Chief Justice) Andrew Cheung, Johnson Lam and Jeremy Poon. Male prisoners were not given the same choice as female prisoners over their hair length, and that was sex discrimination. See our article of 1-May-2018 analysing the CA's faulty judgment. First Instance Justice Thomas Au Hing Cheung (now a CA judge) is vindicated.
24 legislators v CE in Council & others
HK Court of Appeal, 9-Apr-2020
The CA overturns the CFI and rules that the Emergency Regulations Ordinance is constitutional. It also rules that the anti-mask regulation made under the ERO is constitutional for unauthorized assemblies, but it upholds the CFI's ruling that the regulation is unconstitutional in the case of authorized meetings and marches. We expect both sides to go to the Court of Final Appeal.
HK Court of Appeal, 9-Apr-2020
The CA overturns the CFI and rules that the Emergency Regulations Ordinance is constitutional. It also rules that the anti-mask regulation made under the ERO is constitutional for unauthorized assemblies, but it upholds the CFI's ruling that the regulation is unconstitutional in the case of authorized meetings and marches. We expect both sides to go to the Court of Final Appeal.
24 legislators v CE in Council & others
HK Court of Appeal, 10-Dec-2019
The court refuses the Government's applications for a Temporary Validity Order for the anti-mask law or a Temporary Suspension Order of the Court of First Instance judgment that the ERO (in cases of public danger) and most of the PFCR (even if passed by LegCo) are unconstitutional. The substantive appeal will be heard on 9-10 January 2020.
HK Court of Appeal, 10-Dec-2019
The court refuses the Government's applications for a Temporary Validity Order for the anti-mask law or a Temporary Suspension Order of the Court of First Instance judgment that the ERO (in cases of public danger) and most of the PFCR (even if passed by LegCo) are unconstitutional. The substantive appeal will be heard on 9-10 January 2020.
"Long Hair" gets short cut to final appeal
| Justice is blind, except for haircuts
HK Court of Final Appeal, 13-Aug-2019
Mr Leung is granted leave for a final appeal to be heard on 18-Feb-2020. More people in wigs will hear his plea that male and female prisoners should have the same rule on haircuts. The UK removed the different treatment by 1999, as we reported last year in "Justice is blind, except for haircuts", after the Court of Appeal overturned the First Instance judgment which was in his favour.
HK Court of Final Appeal, 13-Aug-2019
Mr Leung is granted leave for a final appeal to be heard on 18-Feb-2020. More people in wigs will hear his plea that male and female prisoners should have the same rule on haircuts. The UK removed the different treatment by 1999, as we reported last year in "Justice is blind, except for haircuts", after the Court of Appeal overturned the First Instance judgment which was in his favour.
"Long Hair" v Commissioner of Correctional Services
| Justice is blind, except for haircuts
HK Court of Appeal, 22-Jan-2019
Mr Leung's application for leave to appeal to the CFA is dismissed. Mr Leung must now take a short-cut, so to speak, and go directly to the CFA, where more people in wigs may hear his plea that male and female prisoners should have the same rule on haircuts. Amazingly, neither side seems to have mentioned that the UK removed the different treatment by 1999, as we reported last year in "Justice is blind, except for haircuts".
HK Court of Appeal, 22-Jan-2019
Mr Leung's application for leave to appeal to the CFA is dismissed. Mr Leung must now take a short-cut, so to speak, and go directly to the CFA, where more people in wigs may hear his plea that male and female prisoners should have the same rule on haircuts. Amazingly, neither side seems to have mentioned that the UK removed the different treatment by 1999, as we reported last year in "Justice is blind, except for haircuts".
Justice is blind, except for haircuts
The Court of Appeal rules that a prison order requiring men to have short hair and allowing women to choose is not discriminatory, because of societal norms for haircuts. We find substantial flaws in this reasoning. We also find that the UK rule which HK inherited was amended by 1999 to remove the discrimination, something that Long Hair's lawyers appear to have overlooked. (1-May-2018)
The Court of Appeal rules that a prison order requiring men to have short hair and allowing women to choose is not discriminatory, because of societal norms for haircuts. We find substantial flaws in this reasoning. We also find that the UK rule which HK inherited was amended by 1999 to remove the discrimination, something that Long Hair's lawyers appear to have overlooked. (1-May-2018)
Sign up for our free newsletter
Recommend Webb-site to a friend
Copyright & disclaimer, Privacy policy