Poon, Jeremy Shiu Chor 潘兆初
Re admission of Timothy Wynn Owen KC to defend Jimmy Lai Chee Ying in NSL case
HK Court of Appeal, 9-Nov-2022
Dismissing the appeal of the Secretary for Justice against admission, the Court writes: "It is of vital importance in the early days of the NSL that our jurisprudence should be developed on solid foundations to reflect adherence to the rule of law in accordance with internationally adopted judicial standards. It would clearly be in the public interest to have the contribution of eminent jurists in developing our jurisprudence in the NSL" and "Public perception of fairness in the trial is of vital importance to the administration of justice"
HK Court of Appeal, 9-Nov-2022
Dismissing the appeal of the Secretary for Justice against admission, the Court writes: "It is of vital importance in the early days of the NSL that our jurisprudence should be developed on solid foundations to reflect adherence to the rule of law in accordance with internationally adopted judicial standards. It would clearly be in the public interest to have the contribution of eminent jurists in developing our jurisprudence in the NSL" and "Public perception of fairness in the trial is of vital importance to the administration of justice"
Re admission of Timothy Wynn Owen KC to defend Jimmy Lai Chee Ying in NSL case
HK Court of First Instance, 19-Oct-2022
Chief Judge Jeremy Poon: "the construction exercise at the trial will most probably involve an in-depth and rigorous analysis of the intricate interplay between national security and the constitutional right to the freedom of expression... it is clearly in the public interest to admit an overseas specialist as eminent as Mr Owen so that the court will have the best assistance to tackle the formidable task at hand."
HK Court of First Instance, 19-Oct-2022
Chief Judge Jeremy Poon: "the construction exercise at the trial will most probably involve an in-depth and rigorous analysis of the intricate interplay between national security and the constitutional right to the freedom of expression... it is clearly in the public interest to admit an overseas specialist as eminent as Mr Owen so that the court will have the best assistance to tackle the formidable task at hand."
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.
HKSAR v Chan Chun Kit
HK Court of Appeal, 11-Oct-2021
The appeal is dismissed. "The type of cable ties involved in the present case can be used for many unlawful purposes" - and that, apparently, with an inferred intent to use them, is enough to break the law. How many other things in your possession could be used for unlawful purposes? The pen in your hand, perhaps?
HK Court of Appeal, 11-Oct-2021
The appeal is dismissed. "The type of cable ties involved in the present case can be used for many unlawful purposes" - and that, apparently, with an inferred intent to use them, is enough to break the law. How many other things in your possession could be used for unlawful purposes? The pen in your hand, perhaps?
11 in HKZM Bridge false concrete tests case have sentences increased up to 2 years' jail after review
ICAC, 2-Jul-2021
ICAC, 2-Jul-2021
Re David Perry QC
HK Court of First Instance, 12-Jan-2021
Mr Perry is approved to visit HK and prosecute leading pan-democrats for unauthorised assembly. Trial begins 16-Feb, but all arrivals from UK are currently banned - will the Govt exempt him, or is he already here? Like HK residents stranded in the UK, he could go somewhere else for 21 days and then do 21 days quarantine in HK, but that's 42 days of taxpayers' fees before he starts, not before 24-Feb.
HK Court of First Instance, 12-Jan-2021
Mr Perry is approved to visit HK and prosecute leading pan-democrats for unauthorised assembly. Trial begins 16-Feb, but all arrivals from UK are currently banned - will the Govt exempt him, or is he already here? Like HK residents stranded in the UK, he could go somewhere else for 21 days and then do 21 days quarantine in HK, but that's 42 days of taxpayers' fees before he starts, not before 24-Feb.
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.
Re David Perry QC
HK Court of First Instance, 10-Jul-2020
Mr Perry is admitted to HK for the appellants Fung Ka Chun and Szeto Ka Fai in the case of the "compensated dating" site linked in paragraph 7.
HK Court of First Instance, 10-Jul-2020
Mr Perry is admitted to HK for the appellants Fung Ka Chun and Szeto Ka Fai in the case of the "compensated dating" site linked in paragraph 7.
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.
Re Mark Taylor Simpson QC
HK Court of First Instance, 31-Oct-2019
The liquidators of China Forestry Holdings Co Ltd apply to admit a UK silk to help them sue KPMG, the auditor, for over HK$1.3bn. Acting Chief Judge Jeremy Poon rejects the proposition that Solicitor-Advocates, who now have rights of audience, are an acceptable alternative to junior barristers to assist the QC. The Bar Council sent 2 Senior Counsel and 2 juniors to oppose the application, while the Secretary for Justice supported it. The quasi-trade union wins. Mr Simpson must be assisted by local barristers.
HK Court of First Instance, 31-Oct-2019
The liquidators of China Forestry Holdings Co Ltd apply to admit a UK silk to help them sue KPMG, the auditor, for over HK$1.3bn. Acting Chief Judge Jeremy Poon rejects the proposition that Solicitor-Advocates, who now have rights of audience, are an acceptable alternative to junior barristers to assist the QC. The Bar Council sent 2 Senior Counsel and 2 juniors to oppose the application, while the Secretary for Justice supported it. The quasi-trade union wins. Mr Simpson must be assisted by local barristers.
"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)
SJ v Joshua Wong Chi Fung, Nathan Law Kwun Chung & Alex Chow Yong Kang
HK Court of Final Appeal, 6-Feb-2018
The appeal against the jail sentences imposed by the Court of Appeal succeeds. Magistrate June Cheung Ting Ngan's sentences of community service were not wrong in principle and not manifestly inadequate. They have already been served. The Court of Appeal can set sentencing guidelines but cannot retrospectively apply them. Paragraph 127 of the judgment rebukes certain comments of Court of Appeal VP Wally Yeung in his judgment.
HK Court of Final Appeal, 6-Feb-2018
The appeal against the jail sentences imposed by the Court of Appeal succeeds. Magistrate June Cheung Ting Ngan's sentences of community service were not wrong in principle and not manifestly inadequate. They have already been served. The Court of Appeal can set sentencing guidelines but cannot retrospectively apply them. Paragraph 127 of the judgment rebukes certain comments of Court of Appeal VP Wally Yeung in his judgment.
SJ v Joshua Wong Chi Fung, Nathan Law Kwun Chung & Alex Chow Yong Kang
HK Court of Appeal, 17-Aug-2017
The Court of Appeal substitutes the community service sentences (already served) issued by Magistrate June Cheung Ting Ngan, with jail terms for the Occupy trio.
HK Court of Appeal, 17-Aug-2017
The Court of Appeal substitutes the community service sentences (already served) issued by Magistrate June Cheung Ting Ngan, with jail terms for the Occupy trio.
Sign up for our free newsletter
Recommend Webb-site to a friend
Copyright & disclaimer, Privacy policy