5 Sept 2024法庭線#4023
Shipping company sues Apple Daily over 471 rolls of “newsprint” uncollected since 2021, seeking storage fees
《蘋果日報》2021 年 6 月底停刊，公司資金則被時任保安局局長李家超，引用《國安法》自同年同月凍結至今。一間總部設於德國的船運公司周三（4 日）入稟高院，指 2021 年 5 月，由加拿大運送 471 卷新聞紙抵港，但《蘋果》至今未取、仍由原告保管存放，遂追討相應儲存費，及後續處理，如銷毀所衍生的費用，但未提及具體金額。司法機構網頁暫未見排期聆訊日子。
Apple Daily ceased publication at the end of June 2021, while the company’s funds have remained frozen since that month after then-Secretary for Security John Lee Ka-chiu invoked the National Security Law. A Germany-headquartered shipping company filed a claim in the High Court on Wednesday (the 4th), saying it transported 471 rolls of newsprint from Canada to Hong Kong in May 2021, but Apple Daily has yet to collect them and they remain stored in the plaintiff’s custody. The company is seeking the corresponding storage fees and subsequent handling costs, including those arising from destruction, although no specific amount was mentioned. The Judiciary’s website had not yet listed a hearing date.
5 Sept 2024法庭線#4024
Radiographer jailed 13 months for LIHKG posts saying ‘kill dogs’ and other remarks inciting assault on police; judge says direct challenge to rule of law
案發時 29 歲放射師 2019 年 12 月在「連登」一則帖文下留言，提及「打狗」、「殺狗」等字眼，被指煽惑他人襲警，事隔近 3 年被起訴一項「煽惑他人有意圖傷人而導致有人身體受嚴重傷害」罪，經審訊後被裁定罪成。暫委法官香淑嫻周四（5 日）在區域法院判被告監禁 13 個月。
法官判刑時指，被告的留言對警方執勤時的安危構成風險，又正面挑戰司法制度及法治，當時帖文的樓主曾回應被告的留言，可見被告已對人構成影響。被告又強調「冇共識冇得搞」，呼籲人夥同犯案。法官以監禁 15 個月作量刑起點，考慮辯方審訊期間承認大部分案情，被告又「初嘗鐵窗滋味」，酌情減刑兩個月，判囚 13 個月。
The radiographer, aged 29 at the time of the offence, posted comments under a LIHKG thread in December 2019 containing phrases including “beat dogs” and “kill dogs”. He was accused of inciting others to assault police and, nearly three years later, was charged with one count of “inciting another with intent to cause injury resulting in grievous bodily harm to a person”. He was convicted after trial. Acting Judge Veronica Shuk Han Heung sentenced the defendant to 13 months’ imprisonment at the District Court on Thursday (the 5th).
In sentencing, the judge said the defendant’s comments posed a risk to police officers’ safety while they were carrying out their duties, and directly challenged the judicial system and the rule of law. The thread starter had responded to the defendant’s comments, showing that the defendant had influenced others. The defendant also stressed that “nothing can be done without consensus”, calling on people to commit the offence together. The judge adopted 15 months as the starting point, and, taking into account the defence’s admission of most of the facts during the trial and that the defendant was experiencing imprisonment for the first time, reduced the sentence by two months at his discretion, sentencing him to 13 months in prison.
5 Sept 2024集誌社#4026
Headliner | Three allegations, including insulting police, overturned after 52-month challenge to Communications Authority; Tsang Chi-ho: “Justice delayed”
港台節目《頭條新聞》2020 年 2 月一集節目，被投訴污衊和侮辱警方，通訊局裁定節目違反《電視節目守則》（下稱《守則》發出警告。港台工會及記協不服，提出司法覆核，高院原訟庭在 2021 年裁定部分覆核得直、但維持涉辱警決定。雙方其後再就敗訴部分上訴，上訴庭周三（4日）頒下書面判詞，駁回通訊局上訴，另以 2:1 裁定辱警投訴不成立。換言之，由被警告至今歷 52 個月，涉《頭條》的投訴全被裁不成立，上訴庭令通訊局撤銷警告。
An episode of RTHK’s Headliner broadcast in February 2020 was complained against for defaming and insulting the police. The Communications Authority ruled that the programme had breached the Television Programme Code (the “Code”) and issued a warning. The RTHK staff union and the Hong Kong Journalists Association, disagreeing with the decision, sought a judicial review. In 2021, the High Court’s Court of First Instance ruled that part of the review was successful but upheld the decision concerning the alleged insult to the police. Both sides subsequently appealed against the parts on which they had lost. In written reasons handed down by the Court of Appeal on Wednesday (the 4th), the court dismissed the Communications Authority’s appeal and, by a 2:1 majority, ruled that the complaint of insulting the police was not established. In other words, 52 months after the warning was issued, all complaints concerning Headliner had been ruled unsubstantiated, and the Court of Appeal ordered the Communications Authority to withdraw the warning.
4 Sept 2024法庭線#4018
10.6 Wan Chai | Five acquitted of rioting remanded for reconsideration; two seek to reopen case, three plan to plead guilty
2019 年 10 月 6 日，《禁蒙面法》生效後翌日，網民發起「反極權反緊急法大遊行」，5 人包括一名案發時 15 歲男生被控暴動，經審訊後獲裁罪名不成立。上訴庭裁定律政司上訴得直，發還原審重新考慮。
案件周三（4 日）在區域法院提訊，辯方指其中兩被告將申請重開案情，控方反對；另外 3 名被告則擬認罪。原審暫委法官高偉雄訂於明年 2 月 17 日處理法律爭議，3 月 10 日作裁決，並於同日處理擬認罪 3 人的答辯和求情。5 人續准保釋。
法官另提及，距離原審裁決已近 3 年，對各被告心理壓力大，期望案件能盡快處理；又指明白需尊重各方大狀的工作，無奈地將案件押後至明年處理。官另指，就辯方申請重開案情，翻查本港似乎沒相關案例，英國則明文拒絕，著雙方可呈上案例協助。
On 6 October 2019, the day after the Prohibition on Face Covering Regulation took effect, netizens organised a mass march against authoritarianism and the Emergency Regulations Ordinance. Five people, including a boy who was 15 at the time of the incident, were charged with rioting and found not guilty after trial. The Court of Appeal ruled that the Department of Justice had succeeded in its appeal and remitted the case to the trial court for reconsideration.
The case came before the District Court on Wednesday (the 4th). The defence said that two of the defendants would apply to reopen the case, while the prosecution objected. The other three defendants intend to plead guilty. Acting judge Ko Wai-hung set 17 February next year for dealing with the legal dispute and 10 March for delivering the decision, as well as handling the pleas and mitigation submissions of the three defendants who intend to plead guilty. The five defendants were granted continued bail.
The judge also noted that nearly three years had passed since the trial court’s decision, placing considerable psychological pressure on the defendants, and said he hoped the case could be dealt with as soon as possible. He said he understood that the work of counsel on all sides had to be respected, but regrettably had to adjourn the case until next year. The judge also said that a search had found seemingly no relevant Hong Kong cases concerning the defence application to reopen the case, while the United Kingdom had expressly rejected such applications, and invited both sides to submit case authorities for assistance.
4 Sept 2024法庭線#4022
Headliner case: appeals partly upheld; court orders withdrawal of Communications Authority warning
通訊事務管理局於 2020 年裁定港台《頭條新聞》內的「無品芝麻官」及「驚方訊息」環節，屬污衊、侮辱警方，並向港台發出警告，節目隨後停播。記協與港台工會提司法覆核挑戰決定，2021 年獲高院裁定部分勝訴。通訊局、港台工會與記協其後各就敗訴部分提上訴。
上訴庭周三（4 日）頒下判詞，一致駁回通訊局上訴，維持原審裁決，即「無品芝麻官」環節並無違反《電視節目守則》；工會、記協一方就「驚方訊息」提出的上訴，則獲判勝訴，上訴庭下令撤銷通訊局的警告。
就主持王喜在「驚方消息」中穿著警服、包著垃圾袋，從垃圾桶冒出，3 名法官對於是否構成辱警、違反《守則》各有意見。首席法官潘兆初認為，雖然諷刺作品在表達上應有更大自由度，但仍有「一條連諷刺作品都無法逾越的體統底線」。另外兩名法官則認為，若內容是針對警察的抗疫工作，非單純針對他們的社會地位，不應被視為違反《守則》，最終以大比數裁定工會一方上訴得直。
通訊局回覆查詢指，會與法律顧問研究判詞，再決定下一步行動。記協發聲明指，留意到通訊局就《頭條新聞》相關集數的裁決，已被法院全部推翻，還港台製作團隊遲來的公道，但《頭條新聞》於 4 年多前、收警告後一個月已停播。至於判決指兩間組織不能就言論自由受損作出違憲挑戰，記協與港台工會指尊重法庭裁決，不會將案件上訴至終審法院。
In 2020, the Communications Authority ruled that the “The Shameless Official” and “Frightening News” segments of RTHK’s Headliner defamed and insulted the police, and issued RTHK a warning. The programme was subsequently taken off the air. The Hong Kong Journalists Association and the RTHK Staff Union sought a judicial review of the decision and won partly in the High Court in 2021. The Communications Authority, the RTHK Staff Union and the Journalists Association subsequently appealed against the parts of the judgment they had lost.
In a judgment handed down on Wednesday (the 4th), the Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed the Communications Authority’s appeal and upheld the original ruling that “The Shameless Official” did not breach the Television Programme Code. The Staff Union and Journalists Association’s appeal concerning “Frightening News” was allowed, and the Court of Appeal ordered the Communications Authority’s warning to be withdrawn.
On whether host Wong Hei’s appearance in “Frightening News”—wearing a police uniform, wrapped in a rubbish bag and emerging from a bin—constituted an insult to the police and breached the Code, the three judges expressed differing views. Chief Justice Andrew Cheung said that although satirical works should have greater freedom of expression, there remained “a threshold of propriety that even satirical works cannot cross”. The other two judges considered that if the content targeted the police’s anti-pandemic work, rather than merely their social standing, it should not be regarded as breaching the Code. The Staff Union’s appeal was ultimately allowed by a majority.
The Communications Authority said in response to enquiries that it would study the judgment with its legal advisers before deciding on its next steps. The Journalists Association said in a statement that it noted the court had overturned all of the Communications Authority’s rulings concerning the relevant episodes of Headliner, belatedly vindicating the RTHK production team. However, Headliner had already been taken off the air more than four years earlier, one month after the warning was issued. Regarding the ruling that the two organisations could not mount a constitutional challenge over an infringement of freedom of expression, the Journalists Association and the RTHK Staff Union said they respected the court’s decision and would not appeal the case to the Court of Final Appeal.
3 Sept 2024法庭線#4016
China Innovation Investment chairman Xin (1963) Xiang and wife sue Apple Daily for defamation; judge to hand down judgment within six months
上市公司中國創新投資有限公司主席向心及其妻龔青，2019 年底入稟高等法院，控告《蘋果日報》發布假新聞，失實指稱原告從事間諜活動，內容涉誹謗，並招致原告蒙受損失，要求法院頒令禁制繼續發布相關文章，並作出賠償。案件周二（3 日）於高院聆訊。
向心夫婦供稱，他們曾因間諜案遭台灣當局調查，但於 2023 年當局決定不再起訴他們，並撤銷離境限制。法官潘兆童聽畢兩人供詞後，指將於 6 個月內頒下判詞。
The chairman of listed company China Innovation Investment Limited, Xin (1963) Xiang, and his wife, Ching Kung, filed a lawsuit in the High Court at the end of 2019, accusing Apple Daily of publishing false news and falsely alleging that the plaintiffs were engaged in espionage. They said the reports were defamatory and caused them loss, and sought an injunction barring the continued publication of the relevant articles, as well as damages. The case was heard in the High Court on Tuesday (the 3rd).
Xin (1963) Xiang and his wife testified that they had been investigated by the Taiwan authorities over an espionage case, but that in 2023 the authorities decided not to prosecute them and lifted the restrictions on their departure. After hearing their testimony, Judge Tony Siu Tung Poon said a judgment would be handed down within six months.
3 Sept 2024法庭線#4017
Man acquitted of unlawful assembly; Department of Justice appeals two and a half years later, hearing adjourned pending legal-aid application
2019 年 11 月 10 日「八區開花」，兩名男子被控在旺角非法集結及使用蒙面物品兩罪， 2021 年被裁定罪名不成立，其中次被告獲批訟費，律政司早前就訟費上訴得直，撤銷原有訟費命令；律政司在裁決後事隔兩年半，以案件呈述方式上訴，要求推翻首被告的無罪裁決，上訴庭周二（3 日）開庭審理。
首被告沒有律師代表，親自應訊，法官詢問被告為何沒聘律師，並解釋上訴程序，被告表示不知若上訴失敗，可能要服刑，現希望申請法援。法官認為繼續案件「唔係幾理想」，要求法援署即時派代表到庭，協助被告；律政司亦同意有責任確保程序公義。
短暫休庭後，有法援署代表到庭。上訴庭將案件押後重新排期，待被告申請法援，被告准以原有條件保釋。
On November 10, 2019, during the “Blossom in Eight Districts” action, two men were charged with unlawful assembly in Mong Kok and using facial coverings. They were acquitted in 2021. The second defendant was awarded costs, but the Department of Justice earlier won an appeal concerning the costs and the original costs order was set aside. Two and a half years after the ruling, the Department of Justice appealed by way of case stated, seeking to overturn the first defendant’s acquittal. The Court of Appeal began hearing the appeal on Tuesday (the 3rd).
2 Sept 2024法庭線#4003
First Anti-Terrorism Case | Lai Chun-pong Convicted of Conspiracy to Cause Explosion; Mitigation Says Not Mastermind and Did Not Know Exact Weight of Explosives
2019 年 12 月 8 日「國際人權日大遊行」前夕，警方搜出大批武器，包括手槍、子彈等，事後多人被捕，被指串謀以槍械和炸彈殺警。當中 7 人不認罪受審，陪審團裁定 6 人無罪、1 人交替控罪罪成。
唯一罪成的賴振邦，被裁定「串謀導致相當可能危害生命的爆炸罪」罪成，辯方周一（2 日）在高等法院求情，指賴並非案中主腦、曾參與測試炸彈搖控器，但非由賴攜帶及操作、亦不知涉案爆炸品的確實重量。
法官張慧玲指，認為陪審團並不信納從犯證人的證供，故未能肯定賴知悉控罪的「訂明標的」，即炸彈將於公共地方放置；但認為陪審團肯定賴聯絡別人製造遙控器、參與試槍，故裁定其交替的爆炸罪成。法官指待聽取同案其他被告求情，料不早於 10 月一併判刑。
On the eve of the 8 December 2019 International Human Rights Day march, police found a large cache of weapons, including pistols and ammunition. Several people were subsequently arrested and accused of conspiring to kill police officers with firearms and bombs. Seven of them pleaded not guilty and stood trial; the jury acquitted six and convicted one on an alternative charge.
The sole person convicted, Lai Chun-pong, was found guilty of conspiracy to cause an explosion likely to endanger life. The defence made mitigation submissions at the High Court on Monday (2nd), saying that Lai Chun-pong was not the mastermind, had participated in testing a bomb remote control but had neither carried nor operated it, and did not know the exact weight of the explosives involved.
Judge [張慧玲] said the jury did not accept the evidence of the accomplice witness and therefore could not be sure that Lai Chun-pong knew the “specified object” of the charge—that the bomb would be placed in a public place. However, the jury was sure that Lai Chun-pong had contacted others to make the remote control and had participated in firearms testing, and therefore convicted Lai Chun-pong of the alternative explosion charge. The judge said sentencing would be conducted together after hearing mitigation from the other defendants in the same case, and was not expected to take place before October.
31 Aug 2024法庭線#3996
8.31 Five-Year Review | All 24 Charged over Prince Edward and Mong Kok Incidents Have Cases Concluded; Protesters Attacked Passengers in Train Carriage, Police Say Minimum Force Used on Platform
8.31 五周年，《法庭線》整合數據，至今有 24 人涉當晚太子、旺角衝突被控，全部案件已審結，共 21 人罪成。記者翻查法庭紀錄、判詞、監警會報告，重組事發經過（相輯、時序表見內文）。
在示威者破壞車站、於車廂中與乘客衝突兩個階段，分別有 4 及 5 人次被控，涉及暴動、刑毀等。案情指示威者掌摑、扯頭髮等，有罪成被告判囚 5 年半，是事件中最重。有乘客擔任控方證人，承認曾推開女子，但未有被控；判詞另形容，有乘客曾「取出鎚仔防衛」。
另一關鍵階段是在太子站月台，大批警員追捕示威者，共 15 人次被控，涉襲警、阻差等。監警會報告指警方被批評濫用武力，而警方解釋有人用雨傘、利器襲警，故使用「所需的最低程度武力，包括警棍及胡椒泡劑」。
此外，24 名被告分為 3 批被起訴，最後一批 16 人事隔近 4 年才被控。控方解釋因警員證人重疊；法庭則接納檢控有延誤，對部分被告酌情減刑。
For the fifth anniversary of 8.31, The Witness compiled the data and found that 24 people had been charged over the clashes in Prince Edward and Mong Kok that night. All the cases have concluded, with 21 people convicted. Reporters reviewed court records, judgments and the Independent Police Complaints Council report to reconstruct what happened (see the full article for the photo gallery and timeline).
30 Aug 2024法庭線#3987
First anti-terrorism case | Former Hong Kong Indigenous member Sut Ieng Chong pleads guilty to unlicensed possession of firearms and ammunition, jailed for 7 years and 4 months; judge accepts genuine remorse
2019 年 12 月 8 日「國際人權日大遊行」前夕，警方搜出大批武器，包括手槍、子彈等，事後多人被捕，被指串謀以槍械和炸彈殺警。當中 7 人不認罪受審，陪審團周四（29 日）裁定 6 人無罪、1 人交替控罪罪成。
同案已認罪被告周五（30 日）開始求情，其中前本土民主前線成員鍾雪瑩開審前承認「無牌管有槍械及彈藥」，辯方指她角色被動，受男友、同案被告蘇緯軒影響下犯案。法官張慧玲同日判刑，接納鍾真心悔改，為維繫情侶關係而犯案，判囚 7 年 4 個月。
被指為案中主謀的吳智鴻同日求情，辯方提及他為資優生、品學兼優，本案與其本性不符。同案其他罪成被告分別於下周一（9 月 2 日）及 9 月 26 、27 日求情，官將聽取求情後一併判刑。
On the eve of the December 8, 2019 International Human Rights Day rally, police found a large quantity of weapons, including handguns and ammunition. Several people were subsequently arrested and accused of conspiring to kill police officers with firearms and bombs. Seven of them pleaded not guilty and stood trial; on Thursday (29th), the jury acquitted six and convicted one of an alternative charge.
The defendants who had pleaded guilty began making mitigation submissions on Friday (30th). Among them, former Hong Kong Indigenous member Sut Ieng Chong admitted before trial to “unlicensed possession of firearms and ammunition”. The defence said her role was passive and that she committed the offence under the influence of her boyfriend, co-defendant So Wai-hin. Judge Cheung Wai-ling sentenced her the same day, accepting that Chung had genuinely repented and had committed the offence to maintain her relationship with her boyfriend. She was jailed for 7 years and 4 months.
Ng Chi-hung, alleged to be the mastermind of the case, also made mitigation submissions that day. The defence said he was a gifted student who excelled academically and was of good conduct, and that the case was inconsistent with his character. The other convicted defendants in the same case will make mitigation submissions next Monday (September 2) and on September 26 and 27 respectively. The judge will sentence them together after hearing the mitigation submissions.
Translations are supplied by the source workbook. Consult the original reporting for context.
