The Court of Appeal decided that a custodial sentence would not be appropriate, and sentenced the 1st and 2nd Respondents to 12 months’ probation and 80 hours of community service respectively.

The Court of Appeal discharged a Prohibition Order restraining the Respondent / ex-husband from leaving Hong Kong on the ground that the travel restriction disproportionately interfered with his freedom of movement under Article 31 of the Basic Law and his common law right to work.

Former Legislative Councillor Leung Kwok-hung, also known as “Long Hair”, won his appeal against the Court of Appeal’s judgment to uphold the Correctional Service Department’s differential hair-cutting requirement for male and female inmates, prescribed in Standing Order 41-05 issued by the Commissioner of Correctional Services.

The Court held that the failure of police officers to display unique identification markings during anti-extradition bill protest operations contravened the Hong Kong Bill of Rights, and that the existing police complaints handling mechanism is not sufficiently independent and fails to meet constitutional requirements.

Rejecting the Plaintiff’s evidence as “a multitude of lies”, the Court dismissed his claim for damages for personal injuries, and awarded costs to the Defendants with an enhanced interest rate that reflects the Court’s disapproval of the Plaintiff’s improper conduct.

The Court of Appeal clarified the proper approach in assessing the risk of dissipation of assets in an application for Mareva injunction.

Dismissing the Defendants’ appeal with costs, the Court of Appeal discussed the proper role of pleadings, and the interplay between the limitation defence and the doctrine of relation back.

The UK Supreme Court tackled the issue of whether the restraint of trade doctrine applied to a restrictive covenant in a lease granted by the respondent’s predecessor in title to the appellant.

The Court of First Instance struck out the Plaintiff’s Statement of Claim, on the grounds that there was no sufficient factual basis to sustain the claim and the Plaintiff had previously made inconsistent and contradictory statements.

The Court of Final Appeal upheld Chow J’s judgment that the returning officer ought to have given the Petitioner a chance to respond to the allegations against her before determining her nomination to be invalid.