LAU HOK TUNG AND OTHERS v. HKSAR

FAMC Nos 99 of 2010 and 9 of 2011

IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NOS99 OF 2010 AND 9 OF 2011 (CRIMINAL)

(ON APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL

FROM HCMA NOS 403 AND 500 OF 2010)

____________________

FAMC No.99 of 2010

Between:

	LEE TO NEI	Applicant
	- and -
	HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION	Respondent

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

FAMC No.9 of 2011

Between:

	LAU HOK TUNG WONG SHU WAH Y & FUNG GARMENT COMPANY LIMITED	1st Applicant 2nd Applicant 3rd Applicant
	- and -
	HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION	Respondent

____________________

 

Appeal Committee:

Mr Justice Bokhary PJ, Mr Justice Chan PJ and Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ

Date of Hearing: 10 June 2011

Date of Determination: 10 June 2011

_________________________

D E T E R M I N A T I O N

_________________________

 

Mr Justice Bokhary PJ:

1.  Is the statutory defence provided by s.26(4) of the Trade Descriptions Ordinance, Cap.362, to be made out by discharging a persuasive burden or is the burden merely evidential?

2.  The point raised by that question is an arguable point of law of great and general importance, and it is involved in each of these cases.  We grant all of these applicants leave to appeal to the Court of Final for them to pursue that point.  But we do not grant leave under the “substantial and grave injustice” limb of s.32(2) of the Court’s statute.  Leave is granted only under the “point of law” limb of that subsection.

(Kemal Bokhary) Permanent Judge

(Patrick Chan) Permanent Judge

(RAV Ribeiro) Permanent Judge

 

Mr Richard Wong (instructed by Messrs Amy Lam and Co.) for the applicant in FAMC 99 of 2010

Mr Andrew Bruce SC and Mr Felix Hoe (instructed by Messrs Anthony Kwan and Co.) for the applicants in FAMC 9 of 2011

Mr Wesley W C Wong and Mr Beney Wong (of the Department of Justice) for the respondent