April 2026: Essential Hong Kong Case Updates

Offences endangering national security — Conspiracy to commit collusion with foreign country or external elements to endanger national security — Collusion by seeking sanction, blockade or other hostile activity by foreign country or external elements against People’s Republic of China and/or Hong Kong Special Administrative Region — Conspiracy to print, publish, etc seditious publications — Sentencing — Whether offence was of ‘grave nature’ — Engaging foreign entity generally regarded as offence of more serious nature — Whether sentencing band applicable to conspiracy charge — Appropriate starting point — Emphasis upon objective seriousness of offence as a whole — Different sentences for conspirators determined by culpability — Aggravating factors — Mastermind — Discount for accomplice witnesses — Corporate criminal liability — Crimes Ordinance (Cap 200) ss 9(1), 10(3)(a), 159A, 159C — Law of the People’s Republic of China on Safeguarding National Security in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region arts 29(4), 31, 33

Offences endangering national security — Conspiracy to commit collusion with foreign country or external elements to endanger national security — Conspiracy to print, publish, etc seditious publications — Elements of offence — Conspiracy continuing offence — Whether prosecution required to prove new agreement where previous agreement became unlawful due to change of law — Corporate criminal liability — Attribution — Conduct of directing will and mind — Crimes Ordinance (Cap 200) ss 9(1), 10(3)(a), 159A, 159C — Law of the People’s Republic of China on Safeguarding National Security in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region art 29(4)

Trial — Judge having ruled no case to answer — Appeal by prosecution — Expedited hearing — Alleged errors of law and principle — Circumstantial evidence — Joint enterprise — If inference of guilt reasonably open to jury to draw, case could be left to jury — Judge usurped jury’s role in assessment of evidence — Prosecution did not show judge CCTV footage or raise pertinent matters

Criminal Law — Manufacturing dangerous drug — Trafficking in dangerous drug — Cocaine — Methamphetamine — Manufacturing and trafficking counts in same indictment — Sentencing — Approach where drugs trafficked derived from same manufacturing operation — Assessment of sentence for both counts beginning with the manufacturing count — Appropriateness of concurrent sentences — Avoidance of double-counting — Dangerous Drugs Ordinance (Cap 134) ss 2, 4(1)(a), (3), 6(1)(a), (2)

Criminal Law — Trafficking in dangerous drugs — Methamphetamine — Sentencing — 973 gm of crystalline solid containing 965 gm of narcotic — 15 years and 10 months’ imprisonment upon plea of guilty — Revised sentencing guidelines in HKSAR v Huang Ruifang (No 3) — Offender seeking to take advantage of new guidelines — 14 years’ imprisonment substituted — Dangerous Drugs Ordinance (Cap 134) s 4(1)(a), (3) 

Criminal Procedure — Appeal — Application for leave to appeal out of time against sentence — Previous application refused by single judge five years previously — Application not renewed within 14 days — No abandonment — Functus officio inapplicable — Court of Appeal granting leave for good reason — Criminal Appeal Rules (Cap 221A) rr 39, 42(3), 74

Criminal Law — Trafficking in dangerous drugs — Sentencing — 1,080 gm of cocaine — 22 years and 4 months’ imprisonment after trial — Revised sentencing guidelines in HKSAR v Huang Ruifang (No 3) — Offender seeking to take advantage of new guidelines — 18 years and 3 months’ imprisonment substituted — Dangerous Drugs Ordinance (Cap 134) s 4(1)(a), (3) 

Criminal Procedure — Appeal — Application for leave to appeal out of time — Whether Court of Appeal functus officio — Secretary for Justice’s application for review of sentence previously determined — Applicant still in the system — Leave to appeal granted — Criminal Procedure Ordinance (Cap 221) ss 81B, 81(C)(2)

Civil Procedure — Originating summons — Service outside jurisdiction — Application under Parent and Child Ordinance — Whether leave required for service out — Rules of the High Court (Cap 4A) O 11 rr 1(2), 9 

Family Law — Children — Children born out of surrogacy arrangements in PRC — Whether parental order ought to be made — Surrogacy arrangements illegal under Hong Kong law and Mainland Chinese law — Best interests of the child — Whether money expended for surrogacy reasonable or ought to be approved — Whether time limit should be extended — Parent and Child Ordinance (Cap 429) s 12 — Human Reproductive Technology Ordinance (Cap 561) s 17

Mortgage action — Possession of property — Whether Legal Charge not enforceable due to breach of Money Lenders Ordinance — Whether plaintiff unlicensed money lender — Whether loans exempt from Ordinance — Exercise of discretion — Contractual estoppel — Money Lenders Ordinance (Cap 163) ss 7, 23; Sch 1

Construction — General building contractor — Register — Building Authority dismissing application for renewal of registration — Building Authority dismissing application for addition of named person as proposed technical director and authorized signatory — Appeal — Statutory duty to give reasons — Whether decision lacking in reasons — Whether the appellate court should review subsequent materials for support of findings — Whether undisclosed policy fettering Building Authority’s discretion — Buildings Ordinance (Cap 123) ss 8C(5), 8E, 13A

Judicial review — Leave to apply for judicial review — Application dismissed — Costs — Principles on costs against unsuccessful applicant — Special or unusual circumstances — Public and private law distinction — Summary assessment

Formation — Bond purchase agreement between bondholder and the company — Whether company’s directors signing agreement on behalf of the company had authority (actual, ostensible or usual) to enter into transaction on company’s behalf — Proper construction of company’s articles of association — Whether transaction nevertheless invalid or unenforceable for want of consideration