Re Geoffrey Robertson Qc

Read the full judgment text of HCMP 628/2001 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 23 February 2001.

1. This is an application by Mr Geoffrey Robertson QC pursuant to section 27(2) of the Legal Practitioners Ordinance, Cap.159 for admission to the Hong Kong Bar only for the purpose of appearing for the appellants in three cases FACV1-3/2001 at the hearing of their appeals to the Court of Final Appeal including preparation for the hearing. These cases involve issues as to the appellants' right of abode in Hong Kong and these in turn involve interpretation of Article 24 of the Basic Law.

Cites 1 case

Case No.HCMP 628/2001
Court
High Court CFI
Date23 Feb 2001
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

HCMP000628/2001

HCMP628/2001

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 628 of 2001

___________

IN THE MATTER of Geoffrey Robertson QC

and

IN THE MATTER of section 27(2)(b) of the Legal Practitioners Ordinance, Cap.159, Laws of Hong Kong

and

IN THE MATTER of rule 8 of the Admission and Registration Rules of the Legal Practitioners Ordinance, Cap.159, of the Laws of Hong Kong

________________

Coram: Hon Leong CJHC in Court

Date of Hearing: 23 February 2001

Date of Judgment: 23 February 2001

_______________

J U D G M E N T

_______________

1. This is an application by Mr Geoffrey Robertson QC pursuant to section 27(2) of the Legal Practitioners Ordinance, Cap.159 for admission to the Hong Kong Bar only for the purpose of appearing for the appellants in three cases FACV1-3/2001 at the hearing of their appeals to the Court of Final Appeal including preparation for the hearing. These cases involve issues as to the appellants' right of abode in Hong Kong and these in turn involve interpretation of Article 24 of the Basic Law.

2. Leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal was granted by the Court of Appeal on 19 January 2001 on the basis that the appeals involve questions of great general and public importance. The appeals will be heard from 28 May 2001 to June 2001.

3. In his affirmation in support of this application, Mr Robert Brooks of Pam Baker & Co., solicitors for the applicant, stated that if this application was granted, local leading counsel Ms Gladys Li SC and junior counsel Mr Kwok Sui Hay would be instructed to appear together with Mr Robertson QC at the hearing of the appeals before the Court of Final Appeal.

4. Mr Kwok for the applicant submits that the appeals have raised novel and complex issues of constitutional and administrative law and the determination of these issues would be of profound importance to the community at large. It is also submitted that Mr Robertson QC is an experienced and eminent barrister in constitutional law and administrative law and has appeared in various constitutional cases in many jurisdictions. The appellants would be best represented by Ms Gladys Li SC and Mr Kwok Sui Hay together with Mr Robertson QC. Given his wide experience in these fields, it is submitted that Mr Robertson's extensive knowledge and experience would be of assistance to the Court of Final Appeal in the determination of these issues.

5. Both the Bar Association and the Department of Justice have indicated that they have no objection to the admission of Mr Robertson QC on such an ad hoc basis.

6. Chan CJHC (as he then was) in the applications by Michael Charles Flesch QC and Mar Jeremy Herbert QC for admission as barristers in Hong Kong [1999] 1 HKLRD 506, had set out certain guidelines for admission of overseas counsel. The following paragraphs in the guidelines respectfully adopt:

"(5) It is for the court to decide whether an overseas counsel should be admitted or not under s.27(2). Hence, even if an application is made by consent, the court must still be satisfied that it is in the public interest to grant the admission. The burden is on the applicant to so satisfy the court. It is therefore important that in every application for admission, all the relevant materials must be placed before the court even if there is no objection from the Department of Justice and the Bar Association;.

(6) The burden of showing why it is in the public interest for an overseas counsel to be admitted for the purpose of a particular case can also be discharged if it can be shown that: (a) the case may involve the determination, possibly by the Court of Final Appeal, of some legal principles which may have an impact on the development of local jurisprudence; and (b) the applicant is a counsel of sufficiently high quality and standing to handle that particular case;"

7. Thus to grant the present application, I have to be satisfied that the applicant has discharged the burden that it is in the public interest to grant the admission. I have considered all the materials before me and having regard to the legal principles which the Court of Final Appeal will be called upon to determine and the qualification and standing of Mr Robertson QC, I am able to say that that burden has been discharged.

8. The application is therefore granted.

( Arthur Leong )
Chief Judge, High Court

Representation:

Mr Kwok Sui Hay, instructed by Messrs Pam Baker & Co for Applicant

Representative for Secretary for Justice - absent

Representative for Hong Kong Bar Association - absent