SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. FTCW AND OTHERS

FAMV Nos 9, 10, 11 & 12 of 2014

& FAMV No. 15 of 2014

FAMV Nos 9-12 of 2014

IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NOS 9-12 OF 2014 (CIVIL)

(ON APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL FROM CACV NOS 101 & 107 OF 2013)

_____________________

Between:

_____________________

__________________________

DETERMINATION

__________________________

Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ:

1.  We are not persuaded that an appeal against the Court of Appeal’s rejection of the claims to refuse disclosure pursuant to a privilege against self-incrimination is reasonably arguable and refuse leave on that ground.

2.  We grant leave to appeal on the question whether the documents in relation to which the Secretary for Justice was granted access and in respect of which the wife was released from her implied undertaking by Order of Ng J dated 14 May 2013, to the extent of the documents for which legal professional privilege is claimed as identified by the husband and STL in affidavits to be filed within 21 days of today pursuant to the direction in paragraph 121(b) of the Court of Appeal’s Disclosure Judgment dated 10 January 2014, may be disclosed to the Secretary for Justice in accordance with the Order of Ng J without first determining the question whether they are protected by legal professional privilege.  

3.  We Direct:

(a) That the stay of the aforesaid paragraph 121 directions be continued pending determination of the appeal herein save in respect of the filing of affidavits by the husband and STL as aforesaid.

(b) That paragraph 2 of Ng J’s aforesaid Order dated 14 May 2013 releasing the wife from her implied undertaking be stayed pending determination of the appeal herein.

(c) That the Court of Appeal’s Order referred to in paragraph 18 of their Enforcement Judgment dated 10 January 2014 permitting the wife to make use of and disclose the Main Judgment as corrected on 6 July 2012 and the Barrell Judgment in their un-redacted form for the purpose of enforcement proceedings be stayed pending determination of the appeal herein.

(d) That the parties have liberty to apply to a single Permanent Judge in relation to this Order.

(e) That the costs of the applications based on a privilege against self-incrimination application be paid by the husband and STL to the wife and the Secretary for Justice.  The costs of the other applications be in the appeal.

(f) That the appeal be fixed for hearing on 13 October 2014.