Court or other Judgments (or decisions) relating to the Legislative Council since 1998

Disclaimer

This section comprises a list of certain court or other judgments (or decisions) relating to the Legislative Council since 1998 which is not intended to be exhaustive. Please visit the website of the Judiciary of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region for reference to other cases not covered in this section.
This section is based upon our interpretation and understanding of the judgments and/or decisions of the courts concerned. All information (including the brief description of the cases) contained in this section are not legal advice and should not be relied upon by anyone as such. They have no legal effect and are not intended to be cited as authorities of any kind. Please refer to the whole judgment or decision of the court(s) concerned in order to fully understand the legal effect of the relevant judgment or decision.
Expand all
CHIM Pui-chung v President of the Legislative Council
Down arrow
Application for leave to apply for judicial review - Re. Disqualification of a Legislative Council (“LegCo”) Member (“Member”) under Article 79(6) of the Basic Law that a Member is convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for more than one month for a criminal offence and is relieved of one’s duty by a motion passed by two-thirds of Members present.
LEUNG Kwok-hung v The Clerk to the Legislative Council and Legislative Council Secretariat
Down arrow
Application for leave to apply for judicial review - Re. Variation of contents of the Legislative Council Oath under the Oaths and Declarations Ordinance (Cap. 11) and the obligation under Article 104 of the Basic Law. Application refused.
LEUNG Kwok-hung v President of the Legislative Council and Secretary for Justice
Down arrow
HCAL 87 of 2006
[2007] 1 HKLRD 387
Application for judicial review in connection with the passage of the Interception of Communications and Surveillance Bill and Article 73 of the Basic Law. Application dismissed.
HCMP 1227 of 2007
[2008] 2 HKLRD 18
On intended appeal from HCAL 87 of 2006. Application to appeal out of time dismissed.
Glory Success Transportation Limited v Secretary for Justice
Down arrow
Application for judicial review - Re.: To quash a resolution passed by the Legislative Council (“LegCo”) to fix a maximum number of public light buses under the Road Traffic Ordinance (Cap. 374); Applicant applied by summons to add LegCo as a party to the case; whether LegCo or the Secretary General of the LegCo Secretariat could be joined as a Respondent to the proceedings. Chu J ordered the Applicant to pay forthwith costs including the costs of the summons, to be taxed if not agreed, to the Respondent.
On an intended appeal from HCAL 93 of 2006 and whether LegCo could be joined as Respondent. Application for leave to appeal against Chu J’s order out of time dismissed.
CHENG Kar-shun and LEUNG Chi-kin v Certain Members of the Legislative Council
Down arrow
Application for leave to apply for judicial review against the orders of the Select Committee to inquire into matters relating to the post-service work of Mr LEUNG Chin-man requiring the applicants to appear before a hearing of the Select Committee to give evidence. Application granted.
HCAL 79 of 2009
[2011] 2 HKLRD 555
Application for judicial review was dismissed.
LEUNG Kwok-hung v President of the Legislative Council
Down arrow
HCAL 64 of 2012
[2012] 4 HKC 83, [2012] 3 HKLRD 470, (2012) 17 HKPLR 578
Application for leave to apply for judicial review in connection with the matter of Rule 92 of the Rules of Procedure of the Legislative Council on the power of the President of the Legislative Council to set time limits and to terminate a debate in Council meetings. Application refused.
On appeal from HCAL 64 of 2012 on, among others, the refusal to grant leave to apply for judicial review. Appeal dismissed.
Applicant’s subsequent application for leave from the Court of Appeal to appeal from CACV 123 of 2012 to the Court of Final Appeal (“CFA”). Application dismissed.
FACV 1 of 2014
[2015] 1 HKC 195, (2014) 17 HKCFAR 689, (2015) 20 HKPLR 116
Leave to Appeal to CFA from the judgment in CACV 123 of 2012 granted by the Appeal Committee but the appeal was dismissed.
KWOK Cheuk-kin v Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs
Down arrow
HCAL 72 of 2012
[2014] 2 HKLRD 283
Applicant applied for judicial review seeking to challenge the constitutionality of section 39(2A) of the Legislative Council Ordinance (Cap. 542), claiming that it was inconsistent with the right of Hong Kong permanent residents to stand for election as guaranteed by Article 26 of the Basic Law and Article 21 of the Hong Kong Bill of Rights. Application dismissed.
CACV 57 of 2014
[2015] 5 HKLRD 881, [2016] 2 HKC 371
On appeal from HCAL 72 of 2012 to the Court of Appeal. Appeal dismissed. Leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal also refused.
Leave to appeal granted by the Appeal Committee on the question : Is section 39(2A) of Cap. 542 inconsistent with Article 26 of the Basic Law and/or Article 21 of the Hong Kong Bill of Rights, and therefore unconstitutional?
FACV 12 of 2016
(2017) 20 HKCFAR 353, (2017) 22 HKPLR 529, [2017] 5 HKC 242
On appeal from CACV 57 of 2014. Appeal dismissed.
WONG Yuk-man v NG Leung-sing and Tommy CHEUNG Yu-yan
Down arrow
HCAL 78 of 2014
[2015] 5 HKLRD 606
Application for leave to apply for judicial review against a decision of the Chairman of the Financial Committee (“FC”) to stop dealing with the motions presented by members of FC under paragraph 37A of the Finance Committee Procedure. Application refused.
On appeal from HCAL 78 of 2014. Application for extension of time to appeal refused and summons on grounds of the intended appeal also dismissed.
TSANG Kwong-kuen v Chairman of the Finance Committee of the Legislative Council
Down arrow
Application for judicial review of the Finance Committee (“FC”) Chairman’s refusal to put the motion under Rule 84(3A) of the Rules of Procedure of the Legislative Council (about withdrawal of a Member of the Legislative Council for direct pecuniary interest) to FC. Application dismissed.
Chief Executive and Secretary for Justice v President of the Legislative Council and Sixtus LEUNG Chung-hang and YAU Wai-ching
Down arrow
HCAL 185 of 2016; HCMP 2819 of 2016
[2016] 6 HKC 417, (2016) 21 HKPLR 705
The Applicants applied for judicial review and sought, among others, a declaration that the President of the Legislative Council (“LegCo”) had no power to re-administer or allow re-administration of any further oaths to be taken by Sixtus LEUNG and YAU Wai-ching under section 19 of the Oaths and Declarations Ordinance (Cap. 11) as they were disqualified from entering on the office of a Member of LegCo (“Member”). Application granted.
The Applicants also sought a declaration that Sixtus LEUNG and YAU Wai-ching were disqualified from assuming the office of a Member as they had refused to swear to uphold the Basic Law and swear allegiance to HKSAR of the People’s Republic of China in accordance with section 21 of Cap. 11 and Article 104 of the Basic Law. Applications granted.
CACV 224, 225, 226 and 227 of 2016
[2016] 6 HKC 541, [2017] 1 HKLRD 460, (2016) 21 HKPLR 743
On appeal from HCAL 185 of 2016 and HCMP 2819 of 2016, the Court of Appeal (“CA”) held that, on the facts, Sixtus LEUNG and YAU Wai-ching declined to take the LegCo Oath when duly requested to do so on 12 October 2016, and by operation of law were disqualified forthwith and had automatically vacated their offices. Appeal dismissed.
CACV 224, 225, 226 and 227 of 2016
Application to CA for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal (“CFA”) dismissed.
FAMV 7, 8, 9 and 10 of 2017
(2017) 20 HKCFAR 390
Sixtus LEUNG and YAU Wai-ching’s application to the Appeal Committee for leave to appeal to CFA from CA’s judgment in CACV 224 to 227 of 2016. Application dismissed.
MOK Ka-kit v President of The Legislative Council and Others
Down arrow
HCAL 189 of 2016
[2017] 4 HKLRD 387
Applicant (who was not an elector of the 3rd Respondent’s constituency) applied for leave to judicially review (a) the decision of the Clerk (“Clerk”) to the Legislative Council (“LegCo”) on 12 October 2016 to confirm the validity of the LegCo Oath taken by the 3rd Respondent on that day; and (b) the LegCo President’s decision dated 18 October 2016 allowing the 3rd Respondent to retake the oath afresh at another sitting of LegCo. Applicant also sought a declaration that the 3rd Respondent be disqualified from entering the office of a LegCo Member. The Court held that since the present applicant was not an elector in the 3rd Respondent’s constituency, he did not have the necessary sufficient interest and hence locus to bring this judicial review. The Court decided to set aside the ex parte leave previously granted to the applicant and dismiss his leave application.
Chief Executive and Secretary for Justice v (involving President of the Legislative Council, Clerk to the Legislative Council, Nathan LAW Kwun-chung, LEUNG Kwok-hung, LAU Siu-lai and YIU Chung-yim)
Down arrow
HCAL 223, 224, 225 and 226 of 2016, and HCMP 3378, 3379, 3381 and 3382 of 2016
[2017] 4 HKLRD 115
Applications for judicial review by the Chief Executive and Secretary for Justice for declarations that the rulings by the President of the Legislative Council (“LegCo”) in accepting the affirmations of four Members-elect of LegCo were unlawful and that the four Members-elect were disqualified from assuming and entering on the office of Members of LegCo. Applications granted.
CACV 200 of 2017, CACV 201 of 2017
[2019] 2 HKC 244, (2019) 24 HKPLR 495
On appeal from HCMP 3382 of 2016 and HCAL 224 of 2016 brought by LEUNG Kwok-hung. Appeal dismissed.
LEUNG Kwok-hung’s application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal. Application dismissed.
HKSAR v LEUNG Kwok-hung
Down arrow
The defendant, a Member of the Legislative Council (“LegCo”) at the material time, was charged with misconduct in public office, contrary to common law and punishable under section 101I(1) of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance (Cap. 221). The defence raised two pre-trial issues based on “freedom of speech” and “parliamentary privilege”, seeking to challenge the jurisdiction of the court to try the offence and the admissibility of certain documents coming from LegCo on which the prosecution intended to rely at the trial. The court rejected the defendant’s pre-trial challenges and proceeded with the trial. The defendant was acquitted.
Secretary for Justice v LEUNG Kwok–hung
Down arrow
HCMA 520 of 2018
[2020] 4 HKC 299, [2020] 3 HKLRD 190
Respondent charged with committing the offence of contempt in contravention of section 17(c) of the Legislative Council (Powers and Privileges) Ordinance (Cap. 382), where the Magistrate in ESS 16969 of 2017 made a ruling on preliminary issues that section 17(c) of Cap. 382 was applicable to the proceedings of the Council or a committee in general but was not applicable to Members of the Legislative Council. The hearing before the Magistrate was adjourned sine die. Appeal by way of case stated against the ruling made by the Magistrate. The Court of Appeal remitted the case to the Magistrate who was also directed to restore the proceedings and proceed with the remainder of the trial until conclusion in accordance with the judgment of the Court.
On appeal from HCMA 520 of 2018. LEUNG Kwok-hung applied to the Appeal Committee for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal. Leave granted.
FACC 3 of 2021
[2021] 5 HKC 532, (2021) 24 HKCFAR 234
Appeal to the Court of Final Appeal dismissed.
HKSAR v Sixtus LEUNG, YAU Wai-ching and others
Down arrow
KCCC 2035 of 2017 (Chinese version only)
Committing the offence of taking part in unlawful assembly in contravention of section 18(1) and (3) of the Public Order Ordinance (Cap. 245); including the issue on the court’s jurisdiction over Legislative Council Members’ conducts in the precincts of the Chamber involving ordinary criminal offences.
郭卓堅 v 梁君彥 (立法會主席)及另一人
Down arrow
Six Members-elect having failed to properly take the Legislative Council (“LegCo”) Oath in October 2016, their purported LegCo Oaths were found or declared to be invalid. Application for leave to apply for judicial review seeking, among others, an order that the remaining Members of LegCo take the LegCo Oath again. Application for leave dismissed, and extension of time for making the application also refused.
KWOK Cheuk-kin and LEUNG Kwok-hung v President of the Legislative Council (“LegCo”) and 39 Members of LegCo
Down arrow
HCAL 1094 and 1120 of 2017
Application for judicial review against the amendment to Rule 17 of the Rules of Procedure of the Legislative Council (“LegCo”) to reduce the quorum for a meeting of a committee of the whole Council from not less than half of all the Members of LegCo (i.e. 35 Members) to 20 Members whereas Article 75 of the Basic Law states that the quorum for the meeting of LegCo shall be not less than one half of all its Members. Leave granted but substantive applications dismissed with costs to the President of the Legislative Council.
On appeal from HCAL 1094 of 2017. Appeal dismissed.
HKSAR v FONG Kwok-shan Christine
Down arrow
FACC 2 of 2017
[2017] 6 HKC 33, (2017) 22 HKPLR 667, (2017) 20 HKCFAR 425
Criminal appeal from HCMA 666 of 2015 (where leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal was granted by the Appeal Committee in FAMC 29 of 2016) against conviction of the offence contrary to sections 11 and 12(1) of the Administrative Instructions for Regulating Admittance and Conduct of Persons (Cap. 382A). Appeal dismissed.
HCMA 666 of 2015
[2017] 2 HKLRD 196, [2017] 2 HKLRD 225, [2017] 4 HKLRD 253, [2017] 4 HKLRD 257
FAMC 29 of 2016
HKSAR v LEUNG Hiu-yeung
Down arrow
FACC 5 of 2017
(2018) 21 HKCFAR 20, [2018] HKC 2
Criminal appeal from HCMA 229 of 2016 (where leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal was granted by the Appeal Committee in FAMC 18 of 2017) against conviction of the offence contrary to section 19(b) of the Legislative Council (Powers and Privileges) Ordinance (Cap. 382) on whether police officers were on duty within “the precincts of the Chamber” and were “officers of the Council” within the meaning of section 2 of Cap. 382. Appeal dismissed.
HCMA 229 of 2016
[2017] 5 HKLRD 653, [2017] 5 HKLRD 678
FAMC 18 of 2017
HUI Chi-fung v Privacy Commissioner for Personal Data
Down arrow
HUI Chi-fung’s appeal to the Administrative Appeals Board against the decision of the Privacy Commissioner for Personal Data in relation to the performance of marshalling duties by the Administration’s public officers in the LegCo Complex. Appeal dismissed.
郭卓堅 v 立法會主席梁君彥及另一人
Down arrow
Applicant applied for leave to apply for judicial review to seek (a) a declaration that it was unconstitutional for any Government officers, other than those designated officials who attend the Legislative Council (“LegCo”) “to sit in on the meetings of LegCo and to speak on behalf of the government” pursuant to Article 62(6) of the Basic Law, to carry out activities freely within LegCo while it was in session; and (b) an injunction to restrain Government officers from going to LegCo to monitor the “activities” of Members of LegCo, contrary to section 19 of the Legislative Council (Powers and Privileges) Ordinance (Cap. 382). Application dismissed.
On appeal from HCAL 751 of 2018. The applicant also applied by summons for leave to adduce fresh evidence on appeal. Appeal and summons dismissed.
Sixtus LEUNG v President of the Legislative Council and Secretary for Justice
KWOK Cheuk-kin v Chief Executive
Down arrow
HCAL 1160, 1164, 1165 and 1178 of 2018
[2019] 1 HKC 104, [2019] 1 HKLRD 292, (2019) 24 HKPLR 175, [2018] 5 HKC 138, (2018) 23 HKPLR 629
Four similar applications for judicial review against the President of the Legislative Council (“President”), the Secretary for Justice and/or the Chief Executive etc. in connection with the passage of the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link (Co-location) Bill by LegCo at the Council meeting of 13 Jun 2018. In gist, the Court of First Instance decided, among others, that leave was granted (i) to the Applicants to amend their Forms 86 in HCAL 1160 of 2018 and HCAL 1165 of 2018 in accordance with the Notices of Amendment; and (ii) to the Applicants in HCAL 1160, 1164, 1165 and 1178 of 2018 to apply for judicial review. However, the Court dismissed the substantive applications for judicial review. In relation to HCAL 1160 of 2018, the Court ordered Sixtus LEUNG to pay the costs (to be taxed if not agreed) of the President who had been unnecessarily dragged into this litigation.
CACV 8, 10, 87 and 88 of 2019
On appeal from HCAL 1160, 1164, 1165 and 1178 of 2018. Appeal dismissed.
HKSAR v CHEUNG Kwai-choi and CHOW Nok-hang
Down arrow
On appeal from ESCC 3406 and 3350 of 2014. Appellants sought to appeal against their convictions or sentence and argued, among others, that section 11 of the Administrative Instructions for Regulating Admittance and Conduct of Persons (Cap. 382A) is unconstitutional. The Court of First Instance held that section 11 of Cap. 382A is constitutional. Appeal against convictions and sentence dismissed.
Application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal from HCMA 438 and 617 of 2015 in relation to conviction of an offence under section 20(b) of the Legislative Council (Powers and Privileges) Ordinance (Cap. 382) and section 11 of Cap. 382A. Application dismissed.
KWOK Wing-hang and 23 others v Chief Executive in Council and Secretary for Justice
Down arrow
LEUNG Kwok-hung v Secretary for Justice and Chief Executive in Council
HCAL 2949 of 2019
[2019] 5 HKC 583, [2019] 5 HKLRD 173, (2019) 24 HKPLR 807, [2019] 6 HKC 452, [2020] 1 HKLRD 1, (2019) 24 HKPLR 859
[2019] 6 HKC 528, (2019) 24 HKPLR 941
Applications for judicial review seeking to impugn the Emergency Regulations Ordinance (Cap. 241) and the Prohibition of Face Covering Regulation (Cap. 241K) made by the Chief Executive in Council under Cap. 241 as being invalid and unconstitutional against certain Articles of the Basic Law. Applications granted.
CACV 541, 542 and 583 of 2019
Appeals against the Court of First Instance’s Judgments in HCAL 2945 and 2949 of 2019. Appeals partially allowed.
CACV 541, 542 and 583 of 2019
Applications for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal. Leave granted.
FACV 6, 7, 8 and 9 of 2020
(2020) 23 HKCFAR 518
On appeal from CACV 541, 542 and 583 of 2019. Appeals by the Applicants dismissed and appeal by the Respondents allowed.
郭卓堅 v 立法會主席梁君彥 and 立法會議員陳健波
Down arrow
Applications for leave to apply for judicial review against the Legislative Council President’s decision to invoke Rule 92 of the Rules of Procedure to specify Hon CHAN Kin-por to preside over the election of the House Committee Chairman for the 2019-2020 session and for interim relief to restrain the holding of the proposed House Committee meeting on 18 May 2020. Applications dismissed.
WONG Ho-ming v Secretary for Justice
Down arrow
HCAL 2124 of 2019
[2020] 3 HKLRD 419, [2020] 6 HKC 214
Application for leave to apply for judicial review against certain election provisions including section 39(1)(e)(i) of the Legislative Council Ordinance (Cap. 542) as being inconsistent with the rights to vote and to stand for election under Article 26 of the Basic Law and/or the right to participate in public life under Article 21 of the Hong Kong Bill of Rights. Leave granted (with an extension of time to apply for leave, if necessary) but the substantive application for judicial review dismissed.