23 Dec 2025法庭線#7726
反恐第二案｜無罪何培欣向終院申上訴許可 終院要求提出不應駁回原因
In the second case under the anti-terrorism legislation, five of the eight defendants, including Ho Pui-yan, were acquitted of all charges. After the verdict, Ho applied for costs, but High Court trial judge Chan Chung-hang said she had brought suspicion upon herself and dismissed the application. The judge also ruled that HK$163,000 and RMB400 found by police at Ho’s residence had been obtained by the defendants in the course of committing the offence and entrusted to Ho for safekeeping, and ordered the money forfeited.
Ho Pui-yan subsequently applied to the Court of Final Appeal for leave to appeal, reportedly in relation to the costs and the handling of the exhibits. On Tuesday (23rd), the Registrar of the Court of Final Appeal said there was no reasonably arguable point, and required the applicant to provide, by 20 January next year, reasons why the application should not be dismissed.
反恐條例第二案，8 名被告中有 5 人獲裁定全部罪名不成立，包括何培欣。何在裁決後申請訟費，原審高院法官陳仲衡指她自招嫌疑，駁回申請。官另裁斷，警方在何住所搜出的 16.3 萬元港幣及 400 元人民幣，是案中被告在犯案過程中取得，交由何保管，予以充公。
何培欣其後向終院申請上訴許可，據悉與訟費及證物處理有關。終院司法常務官周二（23 日）指案件沒有合理可供爭辯之處，限申請方在明年 1 月 20 日前，提出不應駁回其申請的原因。
3 Aug 2023法庭線#8139
指國安委越權建議拒Tim Owen簽證 黎智英申司法覆核許可被駁回 被頒令付訟費
Next Digital founder Lai Chee-ying was charged with “conspiracy to collude with a foreign country” and was granted permission by the court to hire British King’s Counsel Tim Owen to come to Hong Kong to defend him. The Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress subsequently issued an interpretation of Articles 14 and 47 of the National Security Law at the Hong Kong Government’s request, stating that a certificate issued by the Chief Executive should first be obtained before an overseas lawyer may be hired in a case endangering national security.
Lai earlier separately filed proceedings in the High Court and applied for leave for judicial review, asking the Secretary for Justice to declare that the NPCSC interpretation did not affect the court’s earlier decision approving Tim Owen’s coming to Hong Kong to defend him. He also argued that the Committee for Safeguarding National Security had exceeded its powers under the National Security Law by recommending that the Immigration Department refuse to issue Owen a visa. In May this year, Chief Judge of the High Court Jeremy Poon dismissed both the application for leave for judicial review and Lai’s summons application.
In a judgment on costs handed down on Thursday (the 3rd), Justice Jeremy Poon said Lai’s judicial review application was “wholly unmeritorious” and had no prospect of success. The National Security Law expressly states that the Committee’s decisions are not subject to challenge, and Hong Kong courts had no jurisdiction to supervise it. The application should not have been brought, the judge said, ordering Lai to pay costs on an indemnity basis.
壹傳媒創辦人黎智英被控「串謀勾結外國勢力」，獲法庭批准，聘用英國御用大狀 Tim Owen 來港抗辯。全國人大常委會其後應港府提請，就《國安法》第 14 及 47 條釋法，指在危害國安案件批准聘任海外律師前，應先取得特首發出的證明書。
黎智英早前分別入稟高院及提司法覆核，要求律政司宣布，人大釋法不影響法院早前批准 Tim Owen 來港為其抗辯的決定，又指國安委建議入境處拒絕向他批出簽證，僭越《國安法》權力。高等法院首席法官潘兆初今年 5 月，一併駁回司法覆核許可申請及黎的傳票入稟。
法官潘兆初周四（3 日）就訟費頒下判詞，指黎智英的司法覆核申請完全沒有勝訴機會（wholly unmeritorious），《國安法》已列明國安委的決定不受挑戰，本港法院無權監督，不應提出申請，下令黎以彌償基準支付訟費。
31 Jan 2023法庭線#5990
2019年司法覆核速龍小隊無展示編號敗訴 馬屎埔陳伯須向律政司支付逾50萬元訟費
During the anti-extradition bill movement in 2019, seven members of the public and the Hong Kong Journalists Association successively initiated judicial reviews challenging the decision that riot police and the “Special Tactical Contingent squad” did not display officers’ identification numbers on their uniforms while on duty. The then High Court Anderson Ka Ming Chow granted leave to some of the applicants the following year, but Ki Kau Chan’s application involving “Grandpa Chan” was refused, and Ki Kau Chan was also required to pay the Department of Justice’s costs.
Ki Kau Chan and the Department of Justice appeared before the High Court on Tuesday (the 31st) for a hearing on the amount of costs. The Department of Justice said Chan’s document responding to whether the itemised costs were accepted did not comply with the specified format, and asked the court master to award the department its costs directly. Ki Kau Chan objected, saying: “How much more suffering do we have to endure before the rule of law can be upheld?” and “Go ahead and pursue me for the costs if you wish; I have upheld the rule of law.”
2019 年反修例運動期間，先後有 7 名市民及記協提出司法覆核，挑戰防暴警員及「速龍小隊」執勤時，制服上沒警員編號決定。時任高等法院周家明翌年向部分人批出許可，但「馬屎埔陳伯」陳基裘不獲批，兼須向律政司支付訟費。
陳基裘及律政司周二（31 日）在高等法院就訟費數額聆訊。律政司一方指，陳回應是否接受訟費數額細項的文件，不符指定格式，要求聆案官判律政司直接獲得訟費。陳基裘提出反對，稱「到底我哋仲要受幾多苦，先維護到法治？」、「你儘管追討我訟費都好，我維護過法治」。
Translations are supplied by the source workbook. Consult the original reporting for context.
