11 Sept 2025法庭線#7296
Judiciary announces Anthony Kin Keung Chan appointed Court of Appeal judge; senior counsel Eugene Ting Sek Fung appointed Court of First Instance judge
司法機構周四（11 日）公布，特首李家超委任高等法院原訟庭法官陳健強為上訴庭法官，另委任資深大律師馮庭碩為高院原訟庭法官。兩人的委任是由特首根據司法人員推薦委員會的推薦而作出，由周五起生效。
翻查資料，陳健強處理過多宗《國安法》相關申請案件，包括壹傳媒股份被保安局凍結後，黎智英要求獲准行使投票權案、律政司申請就《願榮光歸香港》頒禁制令案，以及香港獨立黨案葡籍被告爭議已失中國籍案。
馮庭碩為私人執業，處理過數宗矚目爭產案，包括霍英東家族爭產案、鷹君爭產案。近年則代表稅務局，就醫生梁家騮獲醫管局賠償候召制度款項需否課稅一案，提出終極上訴為勝訴。
The Judiciary announced on Thursday (11th) that Chief Executive John Lee had appointed High Court Judge of the Court of First Instance Anthony Kin Keung Chan as a judge of the Court of Appeal, and senior counsel Eugene Ting Sek Fung as a judge of the High Court’s Court of First Instance. The appointments were made by the Chief Executive on the recommendation of the Judicial Officers Recommendation Commission and took effect on Friday.
According to records, Anthony Kin Keung Chan handled a number of applications related to the National Security Law, including a case in which Jimmy Lai sought permission to exercise voting rights after shares in Next Digital were frozen by the Security Bureau; the Department of Justice’s application for an injunction against the song “Glory to Hong Kong”; and a dispute involving a Portuguese defendant in the Hong Kong Independence Party case over whether the defendant had lost Chinese nationality.
Eugene Ting Sek Fung is in private practice and has handled several high-profile inheritance disputes, including the inheritance dispute involving the family of Henry Fok and the Eagle Holdings inheritance dispute. In recent years, Eugene Ting Sek Fung represented the Inland Revenue Department in a case concerning whether payments received by doctor Ka Lau Leung from the Hospital Authority as compensation under its on-call system were taxable, and won the final appeal.
3 Jul 2025法庭線#6988
Five Years of the National Security Law | Chief Executive certificates, no remission in prison and concealing evidence: how many of the Government’s arguments have the courts accepted?
全國人大常委會制訂的《國安法》在香港實施 5 年，強調與本地法律銜接、兼容，奉行普通法的香港法院，如何處理兩者法律原則和詮釋的衝突或不一致？本地國安法律與機制持續加強，法院對政府的主張又有何取態？
《法庭線》整理比較近期的案件，顯示法庭大部分情況接納政府的主張，例如上訴庭在「《願榮光》禁制令案」，指出就特首發出證明書，法院應對行政機關的判斷「予以絕對遵從」；在挑戰沒有獄中減刑的司法覆核案，原訟庭亦認同，新做法並非額外懲罰，甚至「有助更生」。
在少數案件，法院肯定普通法的原則，亦劃出內地法律適用的界線。例如終審法院在「支聯會拒交資料案」重申，公平審訊的權利是最重要，控方若堅持引用「公眾利益豁免權」或需考慮撤控。
可見未來，預計仍有一些爭議待解決。例如在「民主派初選 47 人案」，控辯爭議顛覆罪條文中「非法手段」的詮釋，該上訴案將於今年 7 月中開始，在上訴庭聆訊。
The National Security Law enacted by the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress has been implemented in Hong Kong for five years. How have Hong Kong courts, which follow the common law, handled conflicts or inconsistencies between the two systems’ legal principles and interpretations, given the emphasis on linking and compatibility with local laws? As local national security laws and mechanisms continue to be strengthened, what position have the courts taken on the Government’s arguments?
The Witness compiled and compared recent cases, showing that the courts accepted the Government’s arguments in most circumstances. For example, in the injunction case concerning “Glory to Hong Kong”, the Court of Appeal said that, regarding a certificate issued by the Chief Executive, the courts should “give absolute deference” to the executive authorities’ judgment. In a judicial review challenging the absence of sentence remission in prison, the Court of First Instance also agreed that the new approach was not an additional punishment and could even “help rehabilitation”.
In a small number of cases, the courts affirmed common law principles and drew boundaries on the application of Mainland laws. For example, in the Hong Kong Alliance refusal-to-provide-information case, the Court of Final Appeal reiterated that the right to a fair trial was paramount; if the prosecution insisted on relying on “public interest immunity”, it might have to consider withdrawing the charges.
Looking ahead, some disputes are expected to remain unresolved. For example, in the case involving 47 pro-democracy activists over the primary elections, the prosecution and defence are disputing the interpretation of “unlawful means” in the offence of subversion. The appeal will be heard by the Court of Appeal from mid-July this year.
3 Apr 2025Channel C#6650
Judiciary says about 80 anti-extradition law amendment or national security cases received over past year, acknowledges trial dates for many notable cases exceed expectations
立法會財務委員會將於下周舉行特別會議，司法機構昨日（2日）向財委會提交文件，披露各級法院截至今年2月底接獲約2,350宗反修例案件、230多宗國家安全相關案件，即去年新增反修例案件約為50宗，國安案件則約30宗，相當於每月多接獲約4宗反修例案和2.5宗國安案。司法機構表示會優先處理這兩類案件，承認「多宗備受矚目的反修例案件及國安案件的審期超出預計」，而餘下案件大部分將在今年審訊。
The Legislative Council Finance Committee will hold a special meeting next week. In a document submitted to the committee yesterday (2nd), the Judiciary disclosed that the courts at all levels had received about 2,350 anti-extradition law amendment cases and more than 230 national security-related cases by the end of February this year. About 50 anti-extradition law amendment cases and 30 national security cases were newly received last year, equivalent to about four additional anti-extradition law amendment cases and 2.5 national security cases per month. The Judiciary said it would give priority to the two categories of cases, acknowledging that “the trial dates for many high-profile anti-extradition law amendment cases and national security cases have exceeded expectations”, while most of the remaining cases will be tried this year.
3 Jan 2025法庭線#4385
Woman with Two-Way Permit accused of photographing Court of Final Appeal clerk has courtroom photography charge withdrawn; prosecution says law covers only “special persons”
2024 年 10 月，52 歲女子被指在終審法院登記處拍攝文書人員，被控一項「禁止在法庭內攝影等」，周五（3 日）在東區裁判法院再訊，控方申請撤控獲批。主任裁判官蘇文隆一度關注「點解唔繼續告？」，控方指條例僅涉「特別人士」，不包括涉案人士。
翻查條例，控罪牽涉法庭內拍攝或繪畫法官、陪審員及證人，未有提及文書人員。
In October 2024, a 52-year-old woman was accused of photographing a clerk at the Court of Final Appeal’s registry and charged with one count of “prohibition on taking photographs, etc., in court”. When the case was mentioned again at Eastern Magistrates’ Courts on Friday (the 3rd), the prosecution’s application to withdraw the charge was granted. Chief Magistrate Don Man Lung So had asked at one point, “Why not continue with the prosecution?” The prosecution said the legislation concerned only “special persons” and did not include the person involved.
A review of the legislation found that the offence concerns photographing or drawing judges, jurors and witnesses in court, and does not mention clerical staff.
19 Dec 2024明報#4374
Remote hearings promoted; defendants may be barred from attending appeals on pure questions of law
司法機構正推動在法院引入遙距聆訊，提交立法會審議的《法院（遙距聆訊）條例草案》同時建議修例，純粹涉法律問題的刑事上訴及上訴許可的特定上訴程序，被告「無權出席」（not entitled to be present），除非獲終審法院或上訴庭批准，有別現時除指定情况外都「有權出席」的安排。律師會2022年回應諮詢時說，被告應有權以視像方式出席，否則當局應解釋
The Judiciary is promoting the introduction of remote hearings in the courts. The Courts (Remote Hearings) Bill submitted to the Legislative Council for consideration also proposes legislative amendments under which defendants would be “not entitled to be present” in specified appeal proceedings involving criminal appeals and applications for leave to appeal that concern solely questions of law, unless permitted by the Court of Final Appeal or the Court of Appeal. This differs from the current arrangement, under which defendants are “entitled to be present” except in specified circumstances. In its response to a consultation in 2022, the Law Society said defendants should be entitled to attend by video; otherwise, the authorities should explain
22 Dec 2023獨媒#2718
Judiciary Selects Two Court of Final Appeal Appeals for Online Live-Streaming Trial Next Month; Rewatching Allowed but Use Prohibited
司法機構今日（22日）宣布，已選定兩宗明年1月10及16日的終審法院上訴案件，試行在網上現場直播法庭程序，測試現場直播安排的技術可行性。公眾屆時可在終審法院網站觀看該兩宗選定案件的網上直播，網站之後亦會保存影片保存兩至三天以方便重看，但強調公眾包括傳媒不得錄製或使用現場直播片段作任何用途。
The Judiciary announced today (22nd) that it had selected two Court of Final Appeal appeal cases, scheduled for 10 and 16 January next year, for a trial of live-streaming court proceedings online to test the technical feasibility of the arrangements. The public will be able to watch live streams of the two selected cases on the Court of Final Appeal website. The website will subsequently retain the videos for two to three days to facilitate rewatching, but the Judiciary stressed that members of the public, including the media, must not record or use any part of the live streams for any purpose.
21 Nov 2023法庭線#8675
Judiciary Plans to Trial Live-Streaming of Selected Court Cases Early Next Year
終審法院首席法官張舉能在年初法律年度開啟典禮提及，司法機構將成立工作小組，研究現場直播法庭程序的施行細節。司法機構向立法會司法及法律事務委員會提交文件，表示計劃於 2024 年初就選定的案件試行直播，稍後公布細節。
Chief Justice Andrew Cheung Kui-nung said at the opening of the legal year ceremony earlier this year that the Judiciary would set up a working group to study the implementation details of live-streaming court proceedings. In a paper submitted to the Legislative Council Panel on Administration of Justice and Legal Services, the Judiciary said it planned to trial live-streaming for selected cases in early 2024, with details to be announced later.
26 Apr 2023獨媒#6362
Remote Hearings for Criminal Proceedings to Begin as Early as Mid-Next Year; Judiciary Advises Against Their Use in Trials
司法機構早前公布《法院（遙距聆訊）條例草案》，容許刑事案件採用遙距聆訊，早前完成3個月公眾諮詢。根據司法機構向立法會提交的文件，指收到大律師公會、律師會、警隊等持份者意見，普遍「反應正面」。司法機構列出法庭考慮頒令遙距聆訊的七個條件，包括與訟各方的意見和權利、對證人可信性及證據可靠性的影響等。司法機構計劃在今年第四季向立法會提交條例草案，將會在條例通過後6個月開始實行。
The Judiciary earlier announced the Courts (Remote Hearing) Bill, which would allow remote hearings in criminal cases, and completed a three-month public consultation. In a paper submitted to the Legislative Council, the Judiciary said it had received views from stakeholders including the Bar Association, the Law Society and the police, with the response generally “positive”. The Judiciary listed seven conditions for the court to consider making an order for a remote hearing, including the views and rights of the parties and the impact on the credibility of witnesses and the reliability of evidence. It plans to submit the Bill to the Legislative Council in the fourth quarter of this year, with implementation to begin six months after the Bill is passed.
31 Jan 2023獨媒#5988
Tuen Mun photo-deletion case: Female social worker acquitted of criminal damage and dishonest access to a computer; DOJ appeals
2019年7月「光復屯門公園」遊行後，民主黨時任立法會議員林卓廷和許智峯、女社工及時任網媒記者被指要求一男子刪除示威者照片及相關影片。經審訊後，女社工被裁定不誠實取用電腦和刑毀罪名皆不成立。律政司不服，上周五（27日）就女社工的無罪裁決，以案件呈述形式提出上訴，案件現時未排期處理。而林卓廷獲裁定妨礙司法公正罪不成立，律政司則暫未有提出上訴。
After the July 2019 “Reclaim Tuen Mun Park” march, then-Democratic Party Legislative Council members Lam Cheuk-ting and Hui Chi-fung, a female social worker and a then-online media reporter were accused of asking a man to delete photographs and related videos of protesters. After trial, the female social worker was found not guilty of both dishonest access to a computer and criminal damage. The Department of Justice, dissatisfied with the acquittal, filed an appeal in the form of a case stated last Friday (27th). The case has not yet been scheduled for hearing. Lam Cheuk-ting was found not guilty of perverting the course of justice, and the Department of Justice has not so far filed an appeal in that case.
31 Jan 2023法庭線#5991
Court spectator incitement case | Woman in her sixties abandons conviction appeal and begins serving three-month sentence immediately
YouTube 頻道「牧師和你顛」創辦人彭滿圓及六旬婦，被指在 2022 年 1 月旁聽「鄒幸彤六四集結案」時拍手及叫囂，被控「發表煽動文字」等罪。當中六旬婦於 2022 年 10 月裁定罪名成立，判監 3 個月。
Peng Man-yuen, founder of the YouTube channel “Pastor and You Go Crazy”, and a woman in her sixties were accused of clapping and shouting while attending the hearing of the “Chow Hang-tung June 4 assembly case” in January 2022. They were charged with “publishing seditious words” and other offences. The woman was convicted in October 2022 and sentenced to three months’ imprisonment.
Translations are supplied by the source workbook. Consult the original reporting for context.
