New judgments

The 1st and 2nd appellants were convicted on Count 3 of conspiracy to defraud a listed company and its shareholders in relation to a Very Substantial Acquisition governed by the Listing Rules. The prosecution alleged that they made false representations as to the connection/relationship between them, one being a director of the listed company and the other the vendor, and concealed or failed to disclose an interest held by the director in the Acquisition. The alleged concealment or non-disclosure included a Commission Sharing Agreement of October 2008. The 3rd appellant was acquitted.

The dispute concerned five rural lots in San Tsuen, Kam Sheung Road, Pat Heung, New Territories, registered in 1910 in the name of the late Tsang Loi Ki. Madam Lee Chiu Tai claimed continuous adverse possession from 1950 and, in the 2000 action, obtained the 2007 Order after substituted service on Tsang Loi Ki; the order declared his title extinguished under the Limitation Ordinance, Cap 347 and recognised her estate's possessory title. The plaintiff had entered a 1970 rental agreement with Madam So Yuen, occupied portions from 1970, paid rent to KC Tsang until 1980, operated duck and pig farms, and thereafter treated the land as his own, whereas the first defendant contended that a family tenancy arose around 1979 at HK$5,000 annually. After the 2007 Order, the first defendant demanded HK$20,000 in alleged rent arrears and procured a consent summons in the 2009 possession action; the plaintiff paid HK$20,000, and the action was discontinued. The trial court found the alleged 1979 tenancy to be a fabrication and the 2007 Order and consent summons to have been procured by fraud, with the plaintiff signing the consent summons under a mistake.

The applicant pleaded guilty in HCCC 372/2024 to trafficking in dangerous drugs involving 54.8 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 54.1 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride and further methamphetamine-containing material found in a hotel room he had arranged using Javed’s identity card. Police arrested him at the Royal Plaza Hotel with the drugs, paraphernalia and Javed’s identity card; he claimed that he stored Abid's drugs for HK$300 per day and could take some for himself. In DCCC 1073/2023, arising from the same operation, he pleaded guilty to 19 fraud, money-laundering, deception, identity-card and related charges and received four years’ imprisonment. The scam involved replacement SIM cards obtained by impersonating cryptocurrency traders and individuals, HK$508,000 induced from victims, and approximately HK$1.5 million handled through five bank accounts as suspected proceeds of crime. He was 28, had 27 previous convictions, and had continued committing drug and drug-related offences shortly after release from DATC. He later gave two non-prejudicial statements to the authorities, but police assessed their information as having “no practical use”.

Five complaints concerning professional misconduct arose from eight posts attributed to a Facebook account in the name of Vivien Chan Man-wai. Posts 1 to 7 accused Hong Kong judges and the Judiciary of condoning violence, causing disorder, or bearing responsibility for the 2019 unrest; Post 8 re-posted a 2013 article attacking former Chief Justice Andrew Li and added a comment endorsing it. The BDT dismissed the complaint parts concerning Posts 1 to 6 because of a lacuna in the chain of evidence, dismissed Complaint 1 in respect of Post 7, found Complaint 2 in respect of Post 7 proved, made no finding on Complaint 3, and found Complaints 4 and 5 in respect of Post 8 proved; sentence was imposed only for Complaints 4 and 5. The BDT imposed censure, a $40,000 penalty for deliberate and uncooperative conduct, an order that Ms Chan pay the Bar Council's disciplinary and adjournment costs, and publication, circulation, and public-access requirements. Ms Chan advanced 25 grounds on appeal; the Court allowed only the challenge to the penalty and dismissed the other 24 grounds.

The applicant, WAHYU FITRIYANI, sought leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal from the Court of Appeal's judgment of 28 August 2025 dismissing her appeal. Her notice of motion asserted that the judgment was unreasonable and pleaded for a chance to appeal. She did not lodge written submissions by the stipulated deadline.

The applicants, Surimah Tarsodi and Surimah Jamal Bahba, had sought leave for judicial review, which was refused by Deputy High Court Judge KW Lung on 28 October 2024. Their appeal against that refusal was dismissed by the Court of Appeal on 28 August 2025. On 10 September 2025, the applicants filed a notice of motion seeking leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.