Practice Direction 26.1
THE CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST
The List
1. This Practice Direction is issued in place of the former Practice Direction 26.1. It should be read together with Practice Direction (SL3) – Directions made by the Judge in charge of the Constitutional and Administrative Law List pursuant to Order 72 rule 2(3) of the Rules of the High Court.
2. The following classes of cases shall be assigned to the Constitutional and Administrative Law List (“the List”):
(a) applications for judicial review;
(b) applications for habeas corpus;
(c) election petitions;
(d) appeals from decisions of the Obscene Articles Tribunal; and
(e) such other civil cases which raise an issue under the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region or the Hong Kong Bill of Rights Ordinance (Cap. 383) for determination and which a judge of the Court of First Instance or a judge of the District Court certifies as suitable for transfer to the List.
3. Every case assigned or transferred to the List shall be marked with a number beginning HCAL, e.g. HCAL 123/2021.
4. All cases assigned or transferred to the List, including all interlocutory applications in such cases, shall, where practicable, be heard by judges designated by the Chief Judge of the High Court to hear cases assigned or transferred to the List.
Applications for Judicial Review and appeals therefrom
5. To further enhance the expeditious and efficient disposal of applications for judicial review and appeals therefrom, the following measures will apply.
6. The Judge in charge of the List (“the JR Judge”) will have the primary responsibility of managing the List. Another judge (“the Deputy JR Judge”) may be designated from time to time so as to provide assistance as and when appropriate.
7. It has been the practice of the court to issue specific case management directions for individual applications after receiving the papers and having regard to all relevant circumstances including but not limited to whether the applications raise constitutional issues or points of law which are of great general or public importance; generate significant general public interest; impact seriously on public expenditure; or require prompt disposal. To enhance the efficient, appropriate and expeditious progress and disposal of an application as and when appropriate, the following measures may be adopted.
8. The court may exercise tighter and closer case management control of a leave application and/or substantive application by immediately (or at any later time) doing any of the following:
(a) disposing of the leave application on paper, without calling upon the applicant or putative respondent or putative interested party;
(b) inviting any initial response from a putative respondent or putative interested party;
(c) fixing a leave hearing, with or without the putative respondent or putative interested party;
(d) setting a procedural timetable for the filing and service of evidence;
(e) setting a time limit for any interlocutory applications;
(f) fixing a date for the hearing of the substantive application;
(g) giving directions for a respondent to file brief grounds for contesting the application for judicial review or supporting it on additional grounds;
(h) giving further directions in relation to the hearings such as preparation of hearing bundles, exchange of written submissions and authorities and other incidental matters, for example, limiting the length of written submissions and allocation of time for oral submissions.
9. Such case management directions may override the timetable contained in Practice Direction SL3.
10. An applicant may submit with the application (a) suggestions as to case management directions which the court might consider and (b) brief reasons why it is said those proposed directions might be appropriate to the management of the application. Such a document shall not exceed 2 pages.
11. If given notice of the ex parte application, or if leave to apply is granted, the putative respondent or the respondent (as the case may be) should be served by the applicant with any suggested case management directions. Thereafter, the putative respondent or the respondent (as the case may be) and any interested party may (a) respond to the applicant’s suggestions and/or (b) submit suggestions as to case management directions and (c) give brief reasons why it is said those proposed directions might be appropriate to the management of the application. Such a document shall not exceed 2 pages.
12. Even if the parties are agreed as to proposed case management directions, it is in the discretion of the court as to what, if any, specific directions shall be given in any particular case.
13. In fixing the hearing date, the court may take into account counsel’s diary, but is not bound to do so, and is in any event not bound by counsel’s diary in the court’s eventual fixing of the hearing date. The court may also take into account any relevant ongoing legal aid applications or appeals.
14. At the conclusion of the hearing, the court will ordinarily fix the handing down date of the judgment, or (if appropriate, as it sees fit) the dates of the judgment and any reasons to follow. Where, exceptionally, a postponement of the date(s) so fixed is justified, the parties will be notified of the new date(s) accordingly.
15. Practice Direction 4.1 continues to govern appeals and applications for leave to appeal arising from applications for judicial review. In particular, the court may, as and when appropriate, give further directions to expedite an appeal or an application for leave to appeal. The court may also adopt paragraph 14 above for handing down judgment after reserving judgment.
General
16. The JR Judge and the Deputy JR Judge (if designated) will be designated by the Chief Judge of the High Court after consultation with the Chief Justice.
17. This Practice Direction supersedes the previous version of Practice Direction 26.1 on the Constitutional and Administrative Law List which took effect on 1 September 1998.
18. This Practice Direction will take effect on 10 June 2021.
Date : 24 May 2021
| (Andrew Cheung) | |
| Chief Justice |