Following our success in the Court of Final Appeal in FACV 4 of 2011, we have once again vindicated our clients in another appeal from the decision of the Insider Dealing Tribunal in CACV 255 of 2009. Upon allowing the appeal on 6 December 2012, the Court of Appeal quashed all findings of insider dealings and set aside all the orders made against our clients by the Insider Dealing Tribunal on grounds of errors of law made by the tribunal. The orders set aside by the Court of Appeal included orders for disgorgement of actual and nominal profits made from alleged insider dealings in the total sum of HK$69,857,378. The Court of Appeal further ordered the Financial Secretary being the 2nd Respondent in the appeal to pay the costs incurred by our clients in the appeal and the inquiry conducted by the Insider Dealing Tribunal.
This marathon litigation started in 2005, throughout it has been handled by our partner Tommy Tam, joined by Mr Sidney Ho, associate since 2006 and recently Sharon Pang, trainee solicitor also joined the team.
We acted for an elected District Councillor in defending an Election Petition lodged against her in the High Court, challenging the results of the election on the stated grounds of alleged corrupt and illegal conduct. Nine months after lodging the Petition, the Petitioner conceded that there was no merit to continue and applied for leave with the High Court to withdraw the Election Petition. Lam JA agreed to sanction the withdrawal with costs of the proceedings awarded to our client.
The District Councils Ordinance and the District Councils (Election Petition) Rules provide special and stringent statutory requirements to be followed by the parties involved in the Election Petition on withdrawal of an Election Petition. One of the special requirements is to file evidence to satisfy the court that there is no collusion between the petitioner and the respondent in withdrawing an Election Petition.
Mr Alex Chan, partner, assisted by Sharon Pang, trainee solicitor, handled the case.(Case number: HCAL 13/2012)
Our senior associate, Mr. Rocky Wong, accompanied by Ms. Caddy Mo, trainee solicitor, represented the firm and gave a talk on 21 November 2012 on various legal issues arising from possible offences in relation to public disorder or petition by the public. More than 140 staff members of the organization (which is a statutory authority responsible for building related matters in Hong Kong) attended the talk. Frontline staff of the organization are facing such critical issues nowadays in the discharge of their duties. After the presentation, Mr. Wong shared with the floor on follow-up questions and general discussions. The organizers found the talk useful and requested for similar talks to smaller groups to be held in the future.
In HCMP 2475/2012, we successfully applied for the admission of a UK Queen’s Counsel to come to Hong Kong to represent one of our clients in a very substantial criminal case. In his reasons for judgment, the Chief Judge remarked that while the ‘unusual difficulty and complexity’ ground is certainly a familiar ground or category for admission of overseas counsel, it has to be emphasized that the ultimate test or consideration for admission of overseas counsel is that of the public interest. The Chief Judge described the present case might involve ‘the most unique and exceptional circumstances’…when ‘the reputation and integrity of the executive branch of the Hong Kong SAR Government and its system of governance are at stake…’.
Nowadays it is increasingly difficult to bring overseas counsel to Hong Kong to represent clients in trial despite their eminence. The Hong Kong Bar Council objected to the application.
This case is handled by Peter Sit (senior partner), Alex Chan (partner) and Rocky Wong (senior associate) together with a team of litigation lawyers of the firm.
(case number: HCMP 2475/2012)
We have the pleasure to announce that C. K. Kwong, a Senior Partner of our firm, was elected as President of the Asian Patent Attorneys Association (“APAA”) for the term 2012-2015 in an open election which was conducted at the 61st Council Meeting of the APAA in Chiang Mai, Thailand on 31st October 2012.
Since its establishment 43 years ago in 1969, the APAA has grown into a broad based professional organization with over 2,300 intellectual property practitioners as its members from 24 jurisdictions and 18 Recognized Groups (Australia, Bangladesh, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Macau, Malaysia, Myanmar, New Zealand, Pakistan, Philippines, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, Thailand and Vietnam).
This follows the appointment of Mr. Kwong as a Justice of the Peace (JP) by the Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region in 2008 in recognition of his contributions to community services and particularly in promoting intellectual property rights.
Mr. Kwong is qualified as a Chartered Arbitrator of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (London) and a CEDR (Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution) Accredited Mediator. He is a WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organisation) appointed neutral for Arbitration and Mediation and a Domain Name Panelist.
Mr. Kwong is committed to the protection and commercialization of our clients’ intellectual property rights.
We thank you for your continuous patronage.
SIT FUNG KWONG & SHUM
We successfully resisted applications of two incumbent legislators brought before the Appeal Committee of the Court of Final Appeal to seek leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal from judgments of The Honourable Lam JA dismissing an election petition and related applications for leave for judicial review. In the determination, the Appeal Committee identified two questions of law of great general or public importance viz
(a) How do challenges to a Chief Executive election by way of an election petition relate to challenges pursuant to the judicial review procedure?
(b) Does the seven-day time limit in our statute involve any infringement of the right of access to court and therefore unconstitutional?
The Appeal Committee gave leave to the parties to appeal on the above questions though they had become academic.
(FAMV 21, 22, 24-26, 34-36 of 2012)
http://legalref.judiciary.gov.hk/lrs/common/ju/ju_frame.jsp?DIS=84330&currpage=T
Our team led by litigation partner Mr. Roy Leung has recently won an international arbitration for a German corporate client against a PRC developer for breach of contract and recovery of losses and damages arising from the failure by the respondent in completing the construction of a building in Beijing. The Arbitral Tribunal, which consists of 3 renowned arbitrators, allowed each and every item of the damages claimed, together with interest and costs. As PRC law is the governing law under the contract, the arbitration involves a great deal of arguments and analysis of the PRC law on, amongst other things, validity of the contract and validity of any purported termination of the contract.
We continued to sharpen our practice on Election Law. On 9 October 2012, on behalf of one of our clients, we successfully applied to the High Court to obtain an order to correct his Election Return in pursuance of the Order of The Honourable Madam Justice Au-Yeung (HCMP1112/2012). The firm’s Election Law team comprises Mr Tommy Tam, Mr Roy Leung (both partners), Mr Alan Wong and Ms Josephine Tang.
We acted for the first respondent in HCAL85/2012 in resisting the petitioner, an incumbent legislator, in his application for extension of time in respect of his lodging an election petition against our client. Lam JA delivered judgment on 5 October 2012 ruling that since here is only one statement pleaded by the petitioner which was not struck out nor conceded, the petitioner’s case has no real prospect of success, the petitioner has no meritorious case to support an application for extension of time and in the interest of justice, the petition was dismissed.
http://cablev.i-cable.com/video/?id=133283&lang
In the judgment on costs published on 28 September 2012, Hon Lam J awarded costs in favour of the firm’s client, the putative respondent in HCAL83&84/2012, against two incumbent legislators, the applicants in the above two High Court Actions. The guiding principle governing the award of costs in Hong Kong in respect of leave application in which a putative respondent appears and successfully resists leave (as in the present case) is well-settled: costs will be awarded only in the unusual circumstances.
Our partner Jeffrey Hung of our Intellectual Property Department has successfully passed the Patent Advanced Paper for the Preparation of Specifications for United Kingdom and Overseas Patents, under the examinations for the registration of Patent Attorneys in the United Kingdom.
Mr. Hung holds a Bachelor of Engineering in Mechanical Engineering from the Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine, University of London and a Master of Laws from the University of Birmingham, as well as a patent drafting examination certificate issued by Fédération Internationale des Conseils en Propriété Industrielle.
In HCAL 83 and HCAL 84 of 2012, we successfully acted for the Putative Respondent in opposing the applications by way of judicial review of two former legislators as Applicants in applying for leave of the High Court to challenge the Putative Respondent’s election as the Chief Executive of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. The hearing took two days (12 and 13 July 2012). On 30 July 2012, the Hon Lam J delivered his Judgment refusing to grant leave to the Applicants for their challenge. The case was handled by our partners Tommy Tam and Roy Leung, supported by our trainee solicitor Alan Wong and supervised by our senior partner Peter Sit.
