RE JAMES MICHAEL TURNER QC

HCMP 1292/2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 1292 OF 2014

______________________

_______________

J U D G M E N T

_______________

1.  This is an application to admit Mr James Michael Turner QC, a London silk specialising in shipping matters to appear with local senior and junior counsel to defend Mr Chow Chi‑wai, the 1^st accused in HCCC 458/2013.

2.  The trial in those criminal proceedings has been scheduled to commence on 10 November 2014 before a judge sitting with a jury, and the estimated length of the trial is 60 days.  The trial involves the collision on National Day in 2012 between two passenger vessels in the waters northwest but close to Lamma Island which tragically resulted in the loss of 39 lives, including the lives of eight children.

3.  Mr Chow, coxswain of one of the vessels involved, has been indicted on 39 counts of manslaughter and two counts of endangering the safety of others at sea.  The coxswain of the other vessel involved is similarly charged, but is separately represented.  According to the papers before me, the case is likely to be a cut‑throat one between the two accused, while the prosecution will seek to prove the charges against the two respectively.

4.  In the written submissions lodged, the court is told that Mr Turner QC will be retained for the purposes of defending Mr Chow in relation to the issues of collision, seamanship and navigation.  The court has been apprised of the possible issues involved that would require the expertise of Mr Turner QC in the forthcoming criminal trial.  They are said to be issues of unusual complexity and difficulty.

5.  Having considered those issues and the details supplied by those representing the applicant in their written submissions, the Bar Council has now withdrawn its opposition to the admission application.  The original opposition of the Bar is understandable, given the limited material then supplied in support of the application.  Likewise, the Secretary for Justice has also taken the position now that the admission of Mr Turner QC would be in the public interest given the complexity of the issues and given the other public interest considerations involved, such as the subject matter of the prosecution and the publicity generated by the tragedy, and the possible implications of the trial and of the issues involved for other possible actions that may be taken by others concerned.

6.  This is not to say that the applicant has deliberately failed to supply the necessary details in support of the application.  The reluctance on the part of the applicant to disclose, as it were, Mr Chow’s proposed defence in the criminal proceedings is understandable.

7.  Now that the court has been supplied with the relevant details, and now that the Bar and the Secretary for Justice have had the chance of considering those details, the court has reached the conclusion that this is a proper case to admit Mr Turner QC to represent Mr Chow in the forthcoming trial, together with local senior and junior counsel.  Apart from the trial, Mr Turner QC is also admitted to represent Mr Chow in relation to the PTR and all other preliminary proceedings.