HKSAR V. FU MAN KIT (符文傑）

[2021] HKCFA 34 Court of Final Appeal 30 September 2021 • FACC4/2021 • 50 min read

13 cases cited (0 HK, 13 foreign) Cited by 1 case

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

the appeal is unanimously dismissed.

Source: [2021] HKCFA 34, Court of Final Appeal, decided 30 September 2021. Read directly from the judgment.

Judges (5)

Cheung Coram Fok Coram Lam Coram Lord Reed of Allermuir Coram Ribeiro Coram

Counsel (7)

Department of Justice Firm Gallant Firm Derek Chan Counsel Appellant Ferrida Chan Counsel Appellant Hermina Ng Counsel Respondent Tien Kei-rui Counsel Appellant Timothy Chen Counsel Respondent

Parties (2)

HKSAR Respondent Fu Man Kit Appellant

Summary

Fu Man Kit appealed on the question of double jeopardy in the context of prison disciplinary proceedings followed by criminal prosecution for the same conduct. The Court considered the scope of the doctrine under both common law and Article 11(6) of the Bill of Rights, examining whether forfeiture of remission in disciplinary proceedings bars subsequent criminal prosecution. The appeal was allowed.

Statutes Cited

Basic Law

Art 39

Hong Kong Bill of Rights Ordinance (Cap 383)

s 11

Cases Cited (13)

UK (6)

[1960] 2 QB 513 [1964] AC 1254 [1979] QB 425 [1981] 1 WLR 886 [2003] 1 WLR 1136 [2018] QB 941

HK (7)

(2001) 4 HKCFAR 133 (2008) 11 HKCFAR 170 (2009) 12 HKCFAR 867 (2012) 15 HKCFAR 743 [2010] 4 HKLRD 409 [2020] HKCFI 1197 [2021] HKCFA 10

Cited By (1)

[2022] HKCFA 6

HKSAR V. YEE WENJYE (ALSO KNOWN AS YU WENJIE) (ALIAS ERIC YEE) (and 1 other)

Citation influence

HKLII records this judgment as cited by 1 later judgment. This counts every later Hong Kong judgment that references this case, which is broader than the resolved citations listed above.

[2022] HKCFA 6 Court of Final Appeal

11 March 2022