7 Apr 2025法庭線#6657
新田科技城司法覆核｜謝世傑擬撤回、陳嘉琳擬加入或取代 官周五前裁定
Social worker Tse Sai-kit filed a judicial review application seeking to overturn the Environmental Protection Department’s decision to approve the environmental impact assessment report for the San Tin Technopole. The case is scheduled to be heard in June this year, and the High Court dealt with case-management directions on Monday (the 7th). Tse Sai-kit’s side said that he and his family had faced harassment and threats since he filed for judicial review, and that he therefore intended to withdraw from the application. Former Sai Kung District Councillor Chan Ka-lam has meanwhile applied to join or replace Tse Sai-kit in continuing the judicial review. Two senior counsel representing the Environmental Protection Department and the Civil Engineering and Development Department opposed the applications. Benjamin (1957-01-27) Yu said the environmental report for the San Tin Technopole was published in May last year, but Chan only applied to join the case last month, making her application out of time. He also said that, unlike Tse, she did not have a sufficient interest in the case and the court should therefore not approve it. He questioned whether the threats cited by Tse amounted only to his daughter receiving a letter containing news reports. Abraham Lok Shung Chan submitted that the real reason for Tse’s withdrawal was that legal aid had been refused. Judge Ko Ho-man adjourned the decision until before this Friday.
社工謝世傑入稟申請司法覆核，要求推翻環保署批准新田科技城環評報告的決定，排期今年 6 月審理，案件周一（7 日）在高院處理法庭指示。謝世傑一方稱，自提司法覆核後，他和家人受滋擾、威嚇，故擬退出申請；同時前西貢區議員陳嘉琳提出加入，或取代謝世傑繼續是次司法覆核。
兩名分別代表環保署、土木工程拓展署的資深大狀均反對。其中余若海指，新田科技城的環保報告在去年 5 月出爐，但陳至上月才提加入，屬逾時申請，她亦不如謝般，在案中有足夠利害關係，故法庭不應批准。他亦質疑，謝所說的威嚇，只是女兒收到載有報道的信件。陳樂信則提出，謝真正退出的理由，是法援被拒。法官高浩文押後本周五前裁定。
7 Apr 2025法庭線#6658
戶戶送撤出｜逾萬外賣員被指自僱不獲遣散費 16人擬入稟勞審處申索 關注組促政府介入
Deliveroo, the food delivery platform that has operated in Hong Kong for nine years, formally exited the Hong Kong market on Tuesday afternoon (7th). More than 12,000 delivery riders are regarded as self-employed, and Deliveroo has not explained its severance arrangements. Sixteen affected riders sought help from the Labour Department last week to pursue severance pay, long service payments and other compensation, and plan to formally file claims with the Labour Tribunal in the middle of this month.
A delivery rider who had worked for more than five years said, “We are the ones on the frontline. We have to run deliveries whether it’s windy or raining... It [Deliveroo] doesn’t regard us as employees. I think that’s really unfair.” The rider also said an insurance claim for a work-related injury made last year had still not been processed, and would file a claim with the Labour Tribunal to recover medical expenses.
Riders' Rights Concern Group said the delivery riders planning to make claims had all worked for Deliveroo for at least one year and at least 18 hours a week, meeting the definition of an employee. The company’s control over the riders through its app and other means also reflected an actual employment relationship between the two parties. The concern group was also worried that if Deliveroo were wound up, the court might be unable to handle the relevant cases, and urged the government to intervene.
在香港營運 9 年的外賣平台戶戶送（Deliveroo），周二（7 日）下午正式撤出香港巿場，逾 1.2 萬名外賣員被視為自僱人士，戶戶送沒交代遣散安排。有 16 名受影響外賣員上周向勞工處求助，追討遣散費、長期服務金等賠償，將於本月中到勞資審裁處正式入稟申索。
有任職逾 5 年的外賣員稱，「我哋第一線出去，翻風落雨都要跑餐⋯⋯佢（戶戶送）唔當我哋係員工，我覺得呢個太唔公平囉」，另提到去年因工受傷申請的保險索償，至今亦未獲處理，將入稟勞審處追討醫藥費。
外賣員權益關注組指，擬申索的外賣員均為戶戶送工作至少 1 年，每周工作至少 18 小時，符合僱員定義，而公司透過應用程式等控制外賣員，反映雙方有實際的僱傭關係。關注組另擔心，一旦戶戶送清盤，法庭或無法處理相關個案，促請政府介入。
3 Apr 2025Channel C#6650
司法機構稱過去一年新接獲約80宗反修例或國安案 認多宗案件矚目「審期超出預計」
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.
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。
3 Apr 2025集誌社#6651
維權運動員｜轉會被「雪藏」索償勝訴 前空手道精英運動員：望運動界唔係保住一班人利益輸送
After training for years in the sport he loved and hoping to compete for good results, former elite karate athlete Lo Chin-pang was forced to stop because of an ultra vires policy adopted by a sports association. In 2015, he was expelled from his dojo because of a dispute between his instructors. After changing dojos, he was “frozen out” by the Hong Kong Karate Federation for four months on the grounds of a “transfer”, causing him to lose his status and funding as an elite athlete at the Hong Kong Sports Institute. He subsequently changed careers and became a fitness trainer. Two other athletes, Lo Sum-man and Shu Ching, experienced the same situation. The three filed a claim for compensation against the federation. High Court judge Herbert Ho Wing Au-Yeung ruled yesterday (the 2nd) that the three had won, saying the “cooling-off period” policy was ultra vires and served only to protect decision-makers in the karate associations to which the dojos belonged. The judge ordered the federation to pay the three a total of more than $1.57 million in compensation.
Lo Chin-pang, Lo Sum-man and her mother held a press conference today in response. Lo Chin-pang said he had faced considerable pressure over the past decade, and the competition opportunities he had lost could no longer be pursued. He hoped the case would serve as a warning to the sports sector, prompting relevant sports organisations to avoid similar situations when handling comparable incidents in future. He also hoped organisations would “not be about protecting a group’s interests and funnelling benefits”. Lo Sum-man’s mother said most of the federation’s funding came from public money, and it should shoulder social responsibility and be accountable to the public.
為心愛的運動訓練多年，望出賽爭取好成績，卻因體育總會一個越權政策而被逼停止。前空手道精英運動員羅展鵬，2015 年因師傅間的恩怨而被逐出道場，轉換道場後被香港空手道總會以「轉會」為由，「雪藏」4 個月，致失去體院精英運動員資格及資助，為生計轉行成為健身教練。另兩名運動員羅心汶及舒晴有同樣遭遇，三人入稟向總會索償，高院法官歐陽浩榮昨（2日）裁定三人勝訴，指該「冷凍期」政策越權，僅保護道場所屬空手道協會的決策人，下令總會須向三人賠償共逾 157 萬元。
羅展鵬、羅心汶及其母親今開記者會回應，羅展鵬指過去十年面對很多壓力，所失去的比賽機會亦已無法追究，望今次案例可作為運動界的一個警惕，令相關運動機構遇同類事件時，避免類似情況再發生，亦望機構「唔係保住一班人利益輸送」。羅心汶母親亦指總會資金大部分來自公帑，應負社會責任和向市民交代。
2 Apr 2025法庭線#6647
空手道精英運動員轉道場後失資格 索償勝訴 官斥總會完全無視運動員利益
Karate elite athlete Lo Chin-pang had his membership terminated by the Karate Federation in 2015 after switching dojos, and consequently lost his elite athlete status at the Hong Kong Sports Institute, as well as training and funding. Lo filed a claim against the federation for about $2.3 million. Two other athletes in the same situation separately filed claims for about $300,000 and $150,000. All three won their cases.
High Court judge Herbert Ho Wing Au-Yeung handed down a judgment on Wednesday (2nd), ruling that the federation must pay the three athletes more than $1.57 million in total, with Lo awarded more than $1.3 million. The judge said the true purpose of the “freeze period” policy was to restrict better athletes from transferring, thereby protecting the decision-makers of the karate associations to which the dojos belonged.
The judge also said the policy had created a “cruel reality”: regardless of the reason for transferring, athletes faced a four-month “freeze period”. In Lo’s case, this meant losing full-time employment for at least four months. The other two part-time athletes were also unable to receive the Hong Kong Sports Institute’s professional training and support, causing a major impact on their professional development.
空手道精英運動員羅展鵬於 2015 年因轉換道場，被空手道總會終止其會籍，其體院精英運動員資格亦被取消，失去訓練及資助。羅入稟向總會索償約 230 萬元，另有兩名運動員遭遇相同情況，分別向總會入稟索償約 30 萬元及 15 萬元，3 人均勝訴。
高院法官歐陽浩榮周三（2 日）頒下判詞，裁定總會須向 3 人賠償共逾 157 萬元，其中羅獲判償逾 130 萬元。官指，「冷凍期」政策的真正目的是限制更優秀的運動員轉會，以保護道場所屬空手道協會的決策人。
官又指，該政策創造的「殘酷現實」，是 無論運動員因任何原因轉會都有 4 個月的「冷凍期」，以羅為例，會失去全職工作至少 4 個月，另外兩名非全職運動員，亦無法獲得體院的專業訓練及支持，對其專業發展構成重大影響。
2 Apr 2025集誌社#6649
去年遭食環檢走大批月餅 「膳心小館」提訴要求法庭頒令撤銷
In August last year, 40 Food and Environmental Hygiene Department staff inspected the warehouse of social enterprise Agape Garden, saying they had received a complaint that the mooncakes were of unknown origin, and sealed them. In December that year, the department removed the batch of expired mooncakes. Agape Garden challenged the action in court, seeking an order requiring the department to revoke its decision and compensation. The case was heard at the Kwun Tong Magistrates’ Courts today. Acting Principal Magistrate LEUNG Ka-kie said proceedings had not yet formally commenced and adjourned the case to May 16 for mention.
去年 8 月，食環署 40 名職員往社企膳心小館倉庫巡查，稱收到投訴指月餅「來歷不明」作查封，同年 12 月檢走該批過期月餅。膳心小館不服有關行動，向法庭提出申訴，要求法庭頒令食環署撤銷有關決定及要求賠償，案件今在觀塘裁判法院處理。署理主任裁判官梁嘉琪指案件仍未正式展開程序，押後至 5 月 16 日再訊。
1 Apr 2025獨媒#6639
嶺大學生會賴卓賢等人要求法庭頒令親建制人士交出學聯會址 侯叔祺：只要「愛國愛港」學生便隨時可使用會址
The HKFS and Student Activities Fund Limited, which holds the title to two HKFS premises, currently has a board majority made up of pro-establishment figures. Two years ago, it filed a claim in the District Court seeking an order for four former HKFS members to return the two premises, but later withdrew the proceedings. Last Friday (March 28), Lingnan University Students’ Union President Hon Cheuk-yin and Vice-President (External) Lai Cheuk-yin filed proceedings in the High Court, seeking an order requiring the HKFS and Student Activities Fund Limited to hand over the properties and transfer the rights and interests in both properties to a company jointly owned by Hon and Lai.
持有學聯兩個會址物業的「學聯及學生活動基金有限公司」，現時由親建制人士佔董事局大多數，前年曾經入稟區院，要求法庭下令4名前學聯成員歸還兩個會址，其後撤回訴訟。直至上周五（3月28日），現任嶺南大學學生會會長韓焯彥和外務副會長賴卓賢入稟高院，要求法庭頒令「學聯及學生活動基金有限公司」交出物業，並且將兩個物業權利和利益，歸於韓和賴聯名持有的公司所擁有。
1 Apr 2025法庭線#6641
反恐第二案｜專家證人被質疑缺乏化學知識、稱經驗來自「實戰」 控方完成舉證
In early 2020, explosives were found at Caritas Medical Centre and in a Lo Wu MTR train carriage. The Telegram channel “Ninety-Two Lots” subsequently claimed responsibility. Seven people were charged with offences under the Anti-terrorism Ordinance, while one other person was charged with “attempting to make explosives”. All eight pleaded not guilty, and the trial at the High Court entered its 80th day on Tuesday (April 1).\n\nA senior bomb disposal officer from the Explosive Ordnance Disposal Bureau continued to face questioning by the defence. He was challenged over his lack of relevant chemistry knowledge in providing expert opinions on chemicals. The witness said his expert opinion was based on “my personal 18 years of experience handling explosives”, stressing that handling homemade explosives required practical experience and training, “not a chemistry degree”. He also agreed that explaining chemical reactions was not within his area of expertise.\n\nAll prosecution witnesses have finished giving evidence. The prosecution has completed its case after 80 days. The court will deal with the parties’ legal arguments in the absence of the jury, which is not required to return until next Tuesday.
2020 年初，明愛醫院、羅湖港鐵車廂被發現有爆炸品，Telegram 頻道「九十二籤」事後承認責任。7人被控《反恐條例》罪名，餘下 1 人被控以「企圖製造炸藥」罪。8 人不認罪，周二（4 月 1 日）於高院踏入第 80 天審訊。
爆炸品處理課高級炸彈處理主任續接受辯方盤問時，被質疑缺乏相關化學知識，提供化學品的專家意見。證人稱其專家意見源自「我個人 18 年嘅處理爆炸品經驗」，強調處理自製爆炸品需要實戰經驗和訓練，「並不是一個化學學位」；但他亦同意解釋化學反應，並非其專業範疇。
控方所有證人作供完畢，控方完成歷時 80 天的控方案情，法庭將在陪審團避席下，處理雙方的法律爭議，陪審團下周二才需再出庭。
1 Apr 2025法庭線#6642
林卓廷披露游乃強受查案 終院3比2裁定律政司得直 官就條文詮釋現明顯分歧
Lam Cheuk-ting was charged with disclosing the identity of police superintendent Yau Nai-keung, who led the search of Nam Pin Wai on 21 July and was under investigation by the ICAC. On Tuesday (1 April), the five judges of the Court of Final Appeal ruled 3-2 in favour of the Department of Justice, restoring Lam’s conviction for “disclosing the identity of a person under investigation” and the sentence of four months’ imprisonment. Lam, who is serving a sentence in another case, will have additional time added to his imprisonment; without any remission for good behaviour, he may not be released until as late as 2031.
The five judges showed a clear division over how to interpret the provision under which he was charged. Chief Justice Andrew Cheung Kui-nung and Permanent Judge Li Yee considered that the legislative intent of safeguarding the confidentiality of ICAC investigations should be given greater weight, meaning that disclosing any ongoing ICAC investigation constitutes an offence. Permanent Judges Fok Siu-kong and Lam Man-hon disagreed, holding that the wording of the provision was limited to corruption investigations and could not support extending it to all ICAC investigations.
After reading the judgments of the four judges, overseas non-permanent judge Au Chung-leut agreed with Cheung Kui-nung and Li Yee, saying their interpretation established rather than weakened the offence provision. The Witness asked the ICAC for its response to the ruling and an update on its investigation into Yau Nai-keung. The ICAC replied: “The ICAC respects the court’s judgment. The ICAC has no further comment on the investigation mentioned in the case.”
林卓廷被控披露 721 帶隊搜查南邊圍的警司游乃強，受廉署調查一案，終審法院 5 名法官周二（4 月 1 日）以 3 比 2 裁定律政司得直，恢復林「披露受查人身分」的定罪及 4 個月監禁的判刑。正就另案服刑的林再被加監，若沒有獄中減刑，他最遲或至 2031 年才獲釋。
5 名法官就控罪條文的詮釋方法，出現明顯分歧。首席法官張舉能、常任法官李義認為，應該側重維護廉署調查保密的立法原意，即披露任何廉署進行中的調查都屬犯禁。常任法官霍兆剛、林文瀚不同意，認為條文用語只限於貪污調查，沒法支持引伸至廉署的所有調查。
海外非常任法官歐頌律閱讀 4 名法官的判詞後，認同張舉能、李義的看法，指二人的詮釋能確立而不是削弱控罪條文。《法庭線》向廉署查詢對裁決的回應，以及對游乃強的調查進度，獲回覆指「廉署尊重法庭的裁決。對案中提及的調查，廉署沒有補充。」
1 Apr 2025法庭線#6643
11.12中環｜兩人暴動罪成提上訴被駁回 質疑控方盤問突提新指控 官反駁指有基礎
At the “Lunch with You” event in Central on 12 November 2019, two defendants were charged with rioting. After trial, they were convicted and sentenced to four years’ and three years and three months’ imprisonment respectively. They appealed against their convictions, with the appeals heard in the High Court on Tuesday (1st). After hearing submissions, the appellate judge dismissed the appeals the same day and said the written judgment would be handed down within six months.
The appellants argued that, during the prosecution’s cross-examination of the defendants at trial, it “suddenly” played footage alleging that the defendants were at the scene, even though it had never previously been said that the footage was relevant, and questioned whether this amounted to a new allegation. The judge held that the footage formed part of the admitted facts and that the prosecution had a basis for referring to it. The appellants also said the footage showed that the defendants had not accepted any supplies. The judge queried: “That doesn’t mean he wasn’t at the core of the riot or wasn’t participating, does it?” The judge said this could not weaken the cumulative effect of the other evidence.
2019 年 11 月 12 日中環「和你 lunch」，兩人被控暴動，經審訊後被裁定罪成，分別判囚 4 年及 3 年 3 個月。兩人不服定罪提上訴，周二（1 日）在高等法院審理。上訴庭法官聽畢陳詞，即日駁回上訴，6 個月內頒判詞。
上訴方爭議，控方原審盤問被告時，「無端端」播放指控被告在現場的片段，但之前從未指片段相關，質疑屬新指控。官則認為，片段為承認事實，控方有基礎引用。上訴方又指，片段顯示被告無接受物資，官質疑「唔等於佢冇喺暴動核心、唔係參與呀嘛」，指未能削弱其他證據的疊加效應。
Translations are supplied by the source workbook. Consult the original reporting for context.
