HKSAR V. LO KIN MAN (盧建民)

[2021] HKCFA 17 Court of Final Appeal 17 May 2021 • FAMC12/2020 • 6 min read

2 cases cited (0 HK, 2 foreign) Cited by 3 cases

Outcome

Application dismissed

We dismiss the application in relation to the other proposed “substantial and grave injustice” grounds.

Source: [2021] HKCFA 17, Court of Final Appeal, decided 17 May 2021. Read directly from the judgment.

Judges (3)

Fok Coram Ribeiro Coram Stock Coram

Counsel (9)

Bond Ng Solicitors Firm Department of Justice Firm Douglas Lau Counsel Respondent Gladys Li Counsel Applicant Ivan Cheung Counsel Respondent Jason Ko Counsel Applicant Kin Lau Counsel Applicant Lawrence Lau Counsel Applicant Vinci Lam Counsel Respondent

Parties (4)

HKSAR Respondent Leung Tin Kei Applicant Lo Kin Man Applicant Wong Ka Kui Applicant

Case Significance

HKSAR V. LO KIN MAN (盧建民) [2021] HKCFA 17 is a Court of Final Appeal decision of 17 May 2021 engaging the Basic Law, Article 28, and the Public Order Ordinance, section 19. The Court of Final Appeal's holding was: "We dismiss the application in relation to the other proposed 'substantial and grave injustice' grounds," recorded as an application dismissed.

The decision preceded a further Court of Final Appeal ruling in the same matter, HKSAR V. LO KIN MAN (盧建民) [2021] HKCFA 18, and was cited alongside HKSAR V. LEUNG CHUNG HANG SIXTUS (梁頌恆) [2021] HKCFA 24 and HKSAR V. LO KIN MAN (盧建民) (and 1 other) [2021] HKCFA 37, both later Court of Final Appeal matters engaging the same Public Order Ordinance provisions.

Summary

Lo Kin Man, convicted of riot arising from the Mong Kok civil unrest on 8-9 February 2016, applied for leave to appeal against both conviction and sentence. The Court granted leave on the conviction but dismissed the application regarding sentence, holding that the sentence of 7 years' imprisonment was not manifestly excessive. Reasons were provided for the sentence determination.

What did the Court of Final Appeal hold in HKSAR V. LO KIN MAN (盧建民) [2021] HKCFA 17?

In HKSAR V. LO KIN MAN (盧建民) [2021] HKCFA 17, the Court of Final Appeal held that it dismissed 'the application in relation to the other proposed "substantial and grave injustice" grounds,' engaging Article 28 of the Basic Law and section 19 of the Public Order Ordinance.

What later Court of Final Appeal cases relate to HKSAR V. LO KIN MAN (盧建民) [2021] HKCFA 17?

HKSAR V. LO KIN MAN (盧建民) [2021] HKCFA 17 was followed by HKSAR V. LO KIN MAN (盧建民) [2021] HKCFA 18 and HKSAR V. LO KIN MAN (盧建民) (and 1 other) [2021] HKCFA 37, and cited alongside HKSAR V. LEUNG CHUNG HANG SIXTUS (梁頌恆) [2021] HKCFA 24.

Statutes Cited

Basic Law

Art 28

Public Order Ordinance

s 19

Cases Cited (2)

HK (2)

[2020] HKCA 275 [2020] HKCA 646

Cited By (3)

[2021] HKCFA 37

HKSAR V. LO KIN MAN (盧建民) (and 1 other)

[2021] HKCFA 24

HKSAR V. LEUNG CHUNG HANG SIXTUS (梁頌恆)

[2021] HKCFA 18

HKSAR V. LO KIN MAN (盧建民)

Citation influence

HKLII records this judgment as cited by 4 later judgments. This counts every later Hong Kong judgment that references this case, which is broader than the resolved citations listed above.

[2021] HKCFA 37 Court of Final Appeal

4 November 2021

[2021] HKCFA 24 Court of Final Appeal

16 July 2021

[2021] HKCA 807 Court of Appeal

7 June 2021

[2021] HKCFA 18 Court of Final Appeal

18 May 2021