-
Advertisement
Law
Hong KongLaw and Crime
Derek Chan

Legal Tales | What happens in Hong Kong’s top court, hidden in plain sight at the winter wonderland

It may be used as a canvas for Christmas projections, but the building houses independently appointed judges who uphold and develop the city’s laws

Reading Time:3 minutes
Why you can trust SCMP
The Court of Final Appeal building is used as a backdrop for an animated light show during the Christmas season. Photo: Eugene Lee
People who passed by Hong Kong’s Christmas Town attraction at Statue Square Gardens in Central over the past month or so may have noticed that one of the buildings onto which cascading festive animations were projected was slightly more historic than the others. That building, which is a declared monument, houses the Court of Final Appeal (the “Court”).

The Court is the final appellate court within Hong Kong’s judicial system. After the High Court and the Court of Appeal, it provides a second level of appellate review, in contrast with some other jurisdictions that provide only one level of review.

Under Article 82 of the Basic Law, the Court is vested with the power of final adjudication in Hong Kong, meaning that its decisions are not subject to review by any other court and that it has the power to interpret local laws, including the ability to strike down local ordinances on the grounds of unconstitutionality.
Advertisement

In other words, decisions of the highest calibre, also known as landmark decisions, are made by the Court, and they become binding precedents for lower courts to follow.

Landmark decisions tend to clarify points of law which are significant or rule that certain laws are unconstitutional, thereby requiring the executive and legislative branches of government to rectify them.

Advertisement

For example, landmark decisions in the past have clarified elements that the prosecution must prove in order to show that a defendant is guilty of conspiracy to defraud, or to prove misconduct in public office.

The Court has also ruled on whether the city’s existing legislation is constitutional, such as by upholding a non-statutory “letter of no consent” regime used by enforcement agencies, a tool which ensures that proceeds of crime are not dissipated before an offence is proved.

SCMP Series
Legal Tales
[ 37 of 42 ]
Advertisement
Select Voice
Select Speed
1.00x