Hong Kong prides itself on having an independent and professional judiciary. The maintenance of high standards underpins the city’s legal system and rule of law.

It is, therefore, a concern if a judge is found to have extensively plagiarised submissions from lawyers when writing his judgments, rather than using his own thoughts and words.

This is not the first time Chan has improperly copied material for his ruling. He was previously censured for it by Chief Justice Andrew Cheung Kui-nung in 2023, and has been similarly accused on other occasions. This is unsatisfactory.

The Court of Appeal, earlier this month, took the rare step of ordering a retrial in a civil case after finding almost 95 per cent of Chan’s 2024 judgment to have been copied from submissions by the defence.

The court suggested such a step is a last resort, as it means time, money and resources have been wasted. But a new trial was needed as Chan did not appear to have properly considered evidence and legal arguments potentially favourable to the plaintiffs. The principle is that judges must be seen to have been fair and to have used their own judgment in deciding the case.

0.8x0.9x1.0x1.1x1.2x1.5x1.75x