16 Oct 2024法庭線#4147
June 9 Admiralty｜Social worker jailed for four months after admitting assaulting police officer; injured officer seeks over HK$200,000 in damages
2019 年 6 月 9 日百萬人反修例遊行後，大批示威者在立法會示威區外聚集至翌日凌晨。33 歲社工被指有份圍毆警員，早前承認非法集結及襲警罪，判監 4 個月。受襲警早前入稟區域法院，就其傷勢和損失向社工索償至少 20 萬元，案件周三（16 日）於區域法院聆訊。法官羅麗萍聽畢陳詞，將於 6 個月內判定賠償金額。
受襲警庭上稱，案發時他為拯救同僚在「電光火石」間衝前，被示威者包圍襲擊。警又指，他當時失去視覺，感到有人欲搶其警棍，但警棍是「致命武器」，所以其「求生意志」驅使他一直堅持，直至同伴解圍。他指，當時感到驚恐，眼角膜亦留疤痕，但不影響視力。
After a million-strong march against the extradition bill on June 9, 2019, large numbers of protesters gathered outside the Legislative Council protest area until the early hours of the following day. A 33-year-old social worker was accused of taking part in an attack on a police officer. He earlier admitted charges of unlawful assembly and assaulting a police officer and was sentenced to four months in prison. The injured officer earlier filed a claim in the District Court seeking at least HK$200,000 from the social worker for his injuries and losses. The case was heard in the District Court on Wednesday (the 16th). After hearing submissions, judge Phillis Lai Ping Loh adjourned the assessment of damages, which will be determined within six months.
The injured officer told the court that, at the time of the incident, he rushed forward “in a flash” to save a colleague and was surrounded and attacked by protesters. The officer said he temporarily lost his vision and felt that someone was trying to seize his baton, but the baton was a “lethal weapon”, so his “will to survive” drove him to keep holding on until his colleagues came to his aid. He said he was terrified at the time and that his cornea was scarred, though his vision was not affected.
16 Oct 2024法庭線#4149
July 14 Sha Tin New Town Plaza clashes: injured police officer discontinues damages claim against one protester
2019 年 7 月 14 日，沙田新城市廣場發生警民衝突。兩名便衣警稱當晚受示威者襲擊受傷。一警員先後向兩名承認暴動罪的示威者，以及警務處長索償。其中一名示威者早前與警員庭外和解，願意賠償。
針對餘下一名示威者的案件周三（16 日）於區院聆訊，聆案官盧康慧應原告方要求撤銷訴訟。
On 14 July 2019, clashes between police and protesters took place at Sha Tin New Town Plaza. Two plain-clothes police officers said they were injured after being attacked by protesters that night. One officer successively sought damages from two protesters who had admitted rioting, as well as the Commissioner of Police. One of the protesters had earlier reached an out-of-court settlement with the officer and agreed to pay compensation.
The case against the remaining protester was heard in the District Court on Wednesday (16th). Court Registrar Charmaine Hong Wai Lo discontinued the action at the request of the plaintiff.
16 Oct 2024法庭線#4150
Publisher Blue Blue Sky admits failing to keep registers, fined $16,000; previously published books by Au Ka-lam and Shiu Ka-chun
曾為資深傳媒人區家麟、前立法會議員邵家臻出版書籍的出版社「藍藍的天」，被票控於 2024 年 5 月，沒將董事、重要控制人等的登記冊備存在其公司的註冊辦事處內。
「藍藍的天」的代表於周三（16 日）在東區裁判法院，承認共 4 項《公司條例》下罪名。暫委裁判官鍾穎詩指考慮初犯、已作改善，判罰合共 1.6 萬元，限於 30 日內繳交。
The publisher Blue Blue Sky, which previously published books by veteran media worker Au Ka-lam and former Legislative Council member Shiu Ka-chun, was charged with failing in May 2024 to keep registers of directors, significant controllers and others at its registered office.
A representative of Blue Blue Sky admitted four charges under the Companies Ordinance at the Eastern Magistrates’ Courts on Wednesday (16th). Acting Magistrate Wing Sze Chung said the court had taken into account that this was the first offence and that improvements had been made, and fined the publisher a total of $16,000, payable within 30 days.
16 Oct 2024法庭線#4151
Tai Hang Sai Estate redevelopment: Resident allegedly threatens to get knife to slash worker; charge withdrawn after bind-over
石硤尾大坑西邨將清拆重建，一名居民被指拒絕工程公司職員進入樓宇走廊，與對方爭執時稱「我依家入去攞把刀出嚟斬鳩佢」，被控刑事恐嚇罪。控方周三（16 日）在西九龍裁判法院撤控，裁判官溫紹明下令被告以 2,000 元簽保守行為 36 個月，另須支付 1,000 元堂費。
Tai Hang Sai Estate in Shek Kip Mei is to be demolished and redeveloped. A resident was accused of refusing to let an employee of the engineering company enter a building corridor and, during an argument, saying, “I’m going in now to get a knife and slash him.” The resident was charged with criminal intimidation. The prosecution withdrew the charge at West Kowloon Magistrates’ Courts on Wednesday (16th), and Magistrate Jason Siu Ming Wan ordered the defendant to enter into a HK$2,000 bond to keep the peace for 36 months and pay HK$1,000 in costs.
16 Oct 2024法庭線#4153
Kowloon City Water Splashing Festival | 3 men convicted of six charges over spraying police officers and reporters with water; judge says conduct exceeded acceptable standards
2023 年 4 月 9 日九龍城潑水節，被稱為「勇狗」的曾維誠等 3 名男子，涉襲擊 3 名輔警及 3 名《無綫新聞》記者，他們否認 6 項襲警和普通襲擊罪，周三（16日）在九龍城裁判法院被裁定全部罪名成立，3 名被告還押至 11 月 1 日判刑。
裁判官陳志輝指，被告必然知悉警員及記者的身分，尤其 3 名輔警身穿軍裝，當日在場維持秩序。即使兩名男警戴上花圈、臉塗上粉末，他們僅站在商舖門外，手上沒有持水槍或器皿玩樂，明顯不是參加者。
官強調，沒忽視本案在潑水節發生，而潑水有祝福的意思，但被告近距離、明顯有意圖向各事主的眼、耳、面部等位置射水，行為必然超越潑水節一般可接受的標準，「粗野嬉戲」、「玩吓」等形容並不適用，裁定被告蓄意向事主施加武力。
At the Kowloon City Water Splashing Festival on April 9, 2023, three men, including Tsang Wai-sing, known as “Brave Dog”, were accused of assaulting three auxiliary police officers and three TVB News reporters. They denied six charges of assaulting police officers and common assault, but were convicted on all charges at Kowloon City Magistrates’ Courts on Wednesday (16th). The three defendants were remanded in custody until November 1 for sentencing.
Magistrate Brian Chi Fai Chan said the defendants must have known the identities of the police officers and reporters. In particular, the three auxiliary police officers were wearing uniforms and were present to maintain order. Even though two male officers were wearing wreaths and had powder painted on their faces, they were merely standing outside a shop and were not holding water guns or containers for playing, making it clear that they were not participants.
The magistrate stressed that the court had not ignored the fact that the incident occurred during the Water Splashing Festival, where splashing water carries a blessing. However, the defendants sprayed water from close range and clearly intentionally targeted the complainants’ eyes, ears, faces and other areas. Their conduct necessarily exceeded the generally acceptable standards of the festival. Descriptions such as “rough play” and “just fooling around” did not apply, and the court found that the defendants had intentionally used force against the complainants.
15 Oct 2024法庭線#4139
7.21 white-clad men case: Zhirong Wang’s acquittal remitted for reconsideration; further hearing in January, request to leave Hong Kong refused
元朗 7.21 襲擊首宗白衣人暴動案，7 人罪成，1 人罪脫。獲裁無罪的王志榮，上訴庭發還原審重新考慮，案件周二（15 日）在區院提訊。辯方稱與控方商討後申請將案押後至 2025 年 1 月 22 日，於原審區院法官葉佐文席前提訊，另預留同年 2 月底兩天聆訊。
辯方大律師關唐利另提出，望容許王取回回鄉證，並准他離港。法官彭中屏聽取陳詞後，拒絕其申請，王維持原有保釋條件，不得離港。
In the first riot case involving white-clad men in the Yuen Long 7.21 attack, seven people were convicted and one was acquitted. The Court of Appeal remitted the case involving the acquitted Zhirong Wang for reconsideration by the trial court. The case was mentioned at the District Court on Tuesday (15th). The defence said that, after discussions with the prosecution, it had applied to adjourn the case to 22 January 2025 for a mention before District Court Judge Eddie Chor Man Yip, with two days of hearings also reserved for late February of the same year.
Defence barrister Kwan Tong-lai also asked to allow Wong to retrieve his Home Return Permit and leave Hong Kong. After hearing submissions, Judge Chung Ping Pang rejected the application. Wong remains subject to his existing bail conditions and is not allowed to leave Hong Kong.
15 Oct 2024法庭線#4140
Two-way Permit holder accused of photographing judge while observing control-point explosives case granted bail
68 歲持雙程證男子涉於周一，在高院旁聽口岸爆炸品案期間拍攝法官，被控一項「禁止在法庭內攝影等」罪，案件周二（15 日）在東區裁判法院提堂。
被告暫毋須答辯，主任裁判官蘇文隆應控方申請，將案件押後至 12 月 10 日再訊，以待索取法律意見。被告期間獲准以一萬元現金保釋外出、不得離開香港。被告應訊時需由普通話翻譯協助，不斷稱聽不明白。
A 68-year-old Two-way Permit holder was accused of photographing a judge on Monday while observing the control-point explosives case at the High Court. He was charged with one count of “prohibition on photography, etc. in court”. The case was mentioned at the Eastern Magistrates’ Court on Tuesday (15th).
The defendant was not required to enter a plea at this stage. Chief Magistrate Don Man Lung So, on the prosecution’s application, adjourned the case to 10 December for legal advice to be sought. The defendant was granted cash bail of 10,000 dollars and was not allowed to leave Hong Kong. He required the assistance of a Mandarin interpreter during the hearing and repeatedly said that he could not understand.
15 Oct 2024法庭線#4141
PolyU clashes | Five men charged with rioting and other offences more than 4½ years later; one absent from hearing, arrest warrant issued
2019 年 11 月，警方圍堵理工大學內的示威者，雙方爆發衝突。警方事隔 4 年半、於 2024 年 6 月底重新拘捕 5 名男子，當中一人報稱中學教師、兩人報稱學生，控以暴動、刑事毀壞罪，案件周二（15 日）在區域法院提訊。
控方稱，第五被告黎駿杰沒有到庭，警方聯絡其家人，黎的家人指黎今早 10 時出門，之後沒有見過他。法官彭中屏應控方要求發出拘捕令，並下令黎不得保釋。其餘 4 名被告均申請押後案件至 2025 年 1 月 21 日再訊，以徵詢法律意見及翻閱文件， 獲法官批准，4 人期間續准保釋。
In November 2019, police surrounded protesters inside the Hong Kong Polytechnic University, and clashes broke out between the two sides. More than four and a half years later, at the end of June 2024, police re-arrested five men—one of whom reported being a secondary school teacher and two of whom reported being students—and charged them with rioting and criminal damage. The case was brought before the District Court on Tuesday (15th). The prosecution said that the fifth defendant, Lai Chun-kit, failed to appear in court. Police contacted his family, who said that Lai had left home at around 10 a.m. that morning and had not been seen since. At the prosecution’s request, Judge Ernest Lin Kam-hung issued a warrant for Lai’s arrest and ordered that he be held without bail.
The other four defendants applied for the case to be adjourned to 21 January 2025 so that they could seek legal advice and review the case documents. The judge granted the applications, and all four were allowed to remain on bail in the meantime.
10 Oct 2024法庭線#4135
Jimmy Lai’s Defamation Suit Against Ta Kung Pao: Jury Trial Bid Rejected; Judge Says Issues Too Complex for Jury
壹傳媒創辦人黎智英 2020 年入稟高等法院，指控《大公報》發布題為「亂港頭目謀『著草』路線曝光 收費100萬」的文章，指稱黎欲棄保潛逃，內容涉及誹謗。黎要求法庭頒令禁制《大公報》誹謗、道歉及賠償。黎一方申請於審訊中設陪審團，《大公報》則反對。法官歐陽桂如周四（10 日）頒下判詞，駁回黎一方的申請，黎另須向《大公報》一方支付 30 萬元訟費。
判詞指，即使案件涉及公眾利益、政治人物及政治敏感議題，法庭亦不一定在審訊中設陪審團。而本案涉及大量文件，《大公報》一方的辯解亦混雜事實及法律議題，有一定復雜性，不宜交由陪審團處理。法官認為，如審訊不設陪審團，主審法官可事先閱讀文章，再考慮雙方陳詞作推論，相信審訊時間會較短。
Next Digital founder Jimmy Lai filed a writ in the High Court in 2020 alleging that Ta Kung Pao had defamed him in an article headlined “Route for ‘Hong Kong-disrupting ringleader’ to flee exposed; fee HK$1 million”. The article alleged that Lai wanted to abscond after abandoning bail. Lai sought orders restraining Ta Kung Pao from defaming him, as well as an apology and damages. Lai’s side applied for a jury trial, while Ta Kung Pao opposed the application. In a judgment handed down on Thursday (the 10th), Judge Au-Yeung Kwai-yu dismissed Lai’s application and ordered him to pay Ta Kung Pao’s legal costs of HK$300,000.
The judgment said that even where a case involved the public interest, political figures and politically sensitive issues, the court would not necessarily empanel a jury. The case involved a large volume of documents, while Ta Kung Pao’s defence contained a mixture of factual and legal issues and had a degree of complexity, making it unsuitable for a jury to handle. The judge considered that without a jury, the trial judge could read the article in advance and draw inferences after considering both sides’ submissions, and believed that the trial would be shorter.
9 Oct 2024法庭線#4133
Civil servant oath | Post Office worker’s added words render declaration invalid; ordered to retire early, judicial review leave refused
2021 年初，公務員事務局要求公務員宣誓，或簽署聲明擁護《基本法》及效忠香港特區。一名入職近 30 年的郵局職員，於宣誓聲明上自行加上字句「但質疑以上聲明是否適合香港郵政使用」，被評為宣誓無效，遭當局以公眾利益為由，勒令提早退休。他不滿局方決定，入稟高院提司法覆核，法官高浩文周三（9 日）頒下判詞，拒批司法覆核許可。
申請方指，他已簽妥並呈交宣誓表格，而且他所添加的字句並無更改宣誓內容，局方的懲罰過重。法官則指，考慮到公務員數量，局方只接受一種宣誓表格合情合理。表上亦清晰列明，如對聲明內容作出更改、增加或刪減，即告無效。考慮其申請有延誤，理據亦無合理勝訴機會，拒絕批出許可。
In early 2021, the Civil Service Bureau required civil servants to take an oath or sign a declaration upholding the Basic Law and pledging allegiance to the Hong Kong SAR. A Post Office employee who had joined nearly 30 years earlier added the words “but questioning whether the above declaration is suitable for use by Hongkong Post” to the oath declaration. The declaration was ruled invalid, and the authorities ordered him to retire early in the public interest. Dissatisfied with the decision, he applied to the High Court for leave to seek judicial review. On Wednesday (9th), Judge Ko Ho-man handed down his judgment refusing leave for judicial review.
The applicant argued that he had duly signed and submitted the oath form, that the words he added did not alter the substance of the oath, and that the punishment imposed by the bureau was excessive. The judge said that, given the number of civil servants, it was reasonable for the bureau to accept only one form of oath. The form also clearly stated that it would be invalid if the declaration’s content was changed, added to or deleted. In view of the delay in the application and the lack of a reasonable prospect of success, the judge refused to grant leave.
Translations are supplied by the source workbook. Consult the original reporting for context.
