Sauw Yim v. The Law Society of Hong Kong

HCMP 1393/2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 1393 OF 2010

____________

Before: Hon Tang Ag CJHC in Court (Sitting as an additional Judge of the Court of First Instance)

Date of Hearing: 1 September 2010

Date of Judgment: 1 September 2010

______________

JUDGMENT

______________

1.Rule 3 of the Admission and Registration Rules (Cap. 159B) provides that the Law Society shall issue, upon application by a person seeking admission as a solicitor who has satisfied section 4(1)(a) of the Legal Practitioners Ordinance (Cap. 159), a certificate of eligibility for admission as a solicitor in order to obtain a certificate of eligibility.

2.A person applying for a certificate of eligibility has to file with the Law Society a Form 4. 

3.Form 4 is divided into two parts.  The second part contains a declaration by the Principal of the trainee solicitor.  For our present purpose, that requires the Principal to state that he considers the trainee solicitor to be fit to be admitted as a solicitor. 

4.The applicant is unable to procure a Form 4 in respect of the training period between 28 July 2008 and 18 January 2009 (“the 1^st training period”) which she served under a training contract with Mr Richard Michael Healy of Messrs Oldham, Li & Nie.  

5.Under rule 13 of the Admission and Registration Rules, if a person seeking admission is unable to fulfil the formalities prescribed in the Admission and Registration Rules, he/she may apply to the Chief Judge pursuant, for exemption, rule 13 which provides:

“The Chief Judge on special grounds and upon such conditions as he may consider necessary may exempt any person from any of the formalities prescribed by these rules, either absolutely or for any specified period, and may reduce or abridge any of the periods of notice prescribed by these rules upon any such conditions …”

6.This is Ms Sauw’s application for exemption from producing a Form 4 in respect of her 1^st training period.  She is unable to produce the form because Mr Healy has refused to sign one. Apparently, Mr Healy is of the view that since Ms Sauw had decided unilaterally to terminate her training with him, she had acted dishonourably and is not a fit person to be a solicitor.

7.Ms Margot Tung, the Director of Compliance of The Law Society of Hong Kong, has stated in an affidavit filed on 20 August 2010 that after investigation by a panel formed for the purpose, and upon its recommendation, the Council of the Law Society, has resolved not to oppose the application for exemption.  I am told that this is a firm view arrived at in accordance with the view expressed by Ma CJHC (as he then was) in the case of Fu Sze Ying Mabel v The Law Society of Hong Kong, HCMP 908/2008 (unreported, dated 17 June 2008).  I take it that the Council has decided not to oppose the application because it is of the view that the applicant is a fit and proper person to be admitted.  On that basis, I am happy to grant the exemption sought, and I will make an order accordingly.

The Applicant, in person, present.

Mr Ricky S.P. Ng, appointed by the Law Society of Hong Kong, for the Respondent.