HKSAR v. YAU CHIU MING

HCMA300/2002

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 300 OF 2002

(ON APPEAL FROM KCCC 2759 OF 2001)

---------------------

----------------------

---------------------

R U L I N G

---------------------

1. The applicant was represented before me on 14 May 2002 on his appeal against his conviction for an offence of making persistent telephone calls pursuant to section 20(c) of the Summary Offences Ordinance, Cap. 228.  I allowed the appeal on the basis of a drafting error in the charge presented against him and I ordered a retrial.  He was convicted again at that retrial, appealed again and that appeal was dismissed.

2. On 15 November 2005, some three years after the original appeal and subsequent proceedings had concluded, the applicant returned before me to seek his costs of that original appeal.  I declined to do so for reasons set out in my written judgment of the same date.

3. He now applies for a certificate pursuant to section 32(2) of the Court of Final Appeal Ordinance to the effect that the refusal to allow his application for costs raises a point of great and general importance.

4. In my view, it does not.  The application for costs following the applicant’s successful appeal was made well after the event and the delay in making that application was never satisfactorily explained.  Criminal proceedings must come to an end.  Parties cannot return at will to a court years after the event to deal with ancillary matters unless they can show good reason why they have done so.  The applicant in this case has failed to do so. 

5. In my view, the discretionary refusal to entertain an application for costs made three years after the event is not a matter which raises any issue of great and general importance.  I decline to certify the point.