The following cases were recently reported by the Hon Mr Justice Bokhary. See below for His Lordship’s remarks and observations by way of Editor’s Notes.

Pang Siu Wing (彭少榮) v Chungshan Commercial Association Hong Kong (香港中山僑商會) [2024] 1 HKLRD 1031

 “The Association having alleged gross misconduct by the Member, the Judge having rejected that allegation, and the Association appealing against such rejection, the Court of Appeal acted on two principles in tandem. Of those principles, the first is the one, dealt with by the Court of Final Appeal in Solicitor (24/07) v Law Society of Hong Kong (2008) 11 HKCFAR 117 at paras.64–84, that the more serious an allegation is the more compelling must the evidence be to prove it on a preponderance of probabilities. And the second is the principle, dealt with by the Privy Council in Central Bank of Ecuador v Conticorp SA [2015] UKPC 11 at para 7, that a decision exonerating a party of want of probity should not be displaced on appeal except on the clearest grounds.”

HKSAR v Lee Ming Ho (李名豪) [2024] 1 HKLRD 1186

 “In so far as any failure wholly to appreciate the implications of Herry Jane Yusuph’s case may have existed before the present case, this judgment should make, or at the very least go a long way towards making, the position entirely clear.”

Wong Wai Ying Anita v So Kwai Chung [2024] 1 HKLRD 1321

 “The Court of Appeal’s judgment, it is to be observed, says in its opening paragraph that this case highlights the problem of pedestrian and vehicular access by occupants of indigenous village or Ting houses in the New Territories by reason of the unregulated development of such houses in terms of road access.”

Chau Wai Tak v Senmax Property Management Ltd [2024] 1 HKLRD 1280

 “This judgment addresses how the relevant section operates and applies that to the facts of the case.”