BabelCite

Wong Yuk Kwan v. Secretary for Justice

Read the full judgment text of HCAL 71/2015 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 22 June 2016.

Cites 1 case

Case No.HCAL 71/2015
Court
High Court CFI
Date22 Jun 2016
Judge—
Case Document
100%Judiciary

HCAL71/2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST

NO.71 OF 2015

-------------------------

 

IN THE MATTER of an application by the applicant for leave to apply for Judicial Review pursuant to Order 53, rule 3 of the Rules of the High Court, Cap 4A
  and
 

IN THE MATTER of the Decision of the Secretary for Justice to allege in the particulars of the two conspiracy counts in the indictment of HCCC 561/2013 that the applicant had falsely represented that MSL and its beneficial owners were third parties independent of Pearl Oriental Innovation Ltd and its connected persons.
  and
 

IN THE MATTER of the Decision of Secretary for Justice to rely on the opinion of an officer of the Hong Kong Exchange and Clearing Limited to prove the falsity of the above representation pursuant to rule 14A.11(4)(a), Chapter 14A of the Listing Rules, 2010.

-------------------------

BETWEEN
  WONG YUK KWAN Applicant

and
  SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE Putative Respondent

-------------------------

Before: Hon Li J in Court
Date of Hearing: 19 February 2016
Date of Judgment: 22 June 2016
Date of Corrigendum: 22 June 2016

----------------------

CORRIGENDUM

----------------------

Please note the following Corrigendum in the Judgment dated 22 June 2016:-

On Page 22, line T should be:

“ Mr Jonathan Kwan, instructed by Department of Justice, for the putative respondent ”


Dated this 22nd Day of June 2016

  (Benjamin CHAN)
Clerk to Hon Li J

Cites 1 case

Cases cited in this judgment

HKSAR v. Yik Siu-hung and Others
HCCC 561/2013
High Court CFI18 Jan 2021
Other Judgments in This Case

Further hearings and rulings under HCAL 71/2015

Wong Yuk Kwan v. Secretary for Justice
High Court CFI22 Jun 2016