Complaint Against Hong Kong Barrister Douglas Kwok (郭憬憲大律師) of Wong Man Kit SC's Chambers - 香港特別行政區 訴 吳銘揚 (07/05/2021, HCMA197/2020) [2021] HKCFI 1259

I am lodging a formal complaint, as a member of the public, against Hong Kong Barrister Douglas Kwok (郭憬憲大律師) of Wong Man Kit SC's Chambers, Suites 902-905, Bank of America Tower, 12 Harcourt Rd, Central, H.K., for his blatant breach of paragraphs 10.29 & 10.30 of the Bar Code, in that he has failed to act with candour and independence in the interests of justice, and knowingly deceived or misled the Court, when making a mitigation speech at Eastern Magistrates' Courts (ESCC 2524/2019).  Alternatively, he was incompetent in his professional activities, and breached paragraphs 4.1 (d) of the Bar Code in the same matter.


The material facts had been set out by Madam Justice Maggie Poon in 香港特別行政區 訴 吳銘揚 (07/05/2021, HCMA197/2020) [2021] HKCFI 1259: 

 

 

"50.  從上述原訟法庭法官處理擔保的謄本可見，在原審裁判官席前的確出現她所指的曾被「一個具相當經驗的大律師誤導而作出不恰當的判刑」的罕見情況。當然本席不能妄下定論，郭大律師是刻意誤導裁判官或只是無心之失、或只是誤解了原訟法庭法官的判詞內容。


51.  本席不能忽視，這些不盡不實的陳述的確是滲透、散落和彌漫在郭大律師的整個求情陳詞之內的，再加上郭大律師的當事人即上訴人斷然拒絕接受感化，才導致原審裁判官在別無選擇地判處上訴人「有條件的釋放」。

52.  郭大律師資歷菲淺，他對原審裁判官強調他所引述的是原訟法庭法官所用的字眼。郭大律師後來向原審裁判官解釋，肯定意思上沒有任何扭曲：「字眼上如果係有講出入嘅地方呢，我認為唔係出入，最多係精華咗」，與他之前言之鑿鑿地強調在沒有相關判詞謄本下，他是很誠實地向原審裁判官全盤展示原訟法庭法官席前的言論，不盡相同：前者是意會後的精華（當中包含覆述者對判詞的個人理解後的整合)，後者則是一字不漏的覆述。正確理解判詞、判案書、案例等，是一名大律師最基本的基礎入門功力，本席對錯誤理解判詞一事可以發生在具有相當資歷的郭大律師身上，深感詫異。要是他仍不能辨識他對判詞的理解不準確的話，他著實應就自己的理解能力深切反省。一名大律師在未能完全掌握判詞的真正意思，卻信誓旦旦地向法庭指出自己是隻字不漏地重複判詞的內容，破壞了法庭與大律師之間恒久以來建立的誠信關係，是極其可悲的現象。郭大律師是向裁判官清晰的表示，他所覆述的是「高等法院原訟庭嘅字眼嚟嘅」[38]，整體情況實難免會給人郭大律故意扭曲原訟法庭法官的言論，作出誤述以期達致對他的當事人最有利的判刑結果的印象。

53.  根據香港大律師行為守則第10 章 “Duty to the Court and Conduct in Court”:

“10.29 A practising barrister has an overriding duty to the Court to act with candour and independence in the interests of justice.

10.30 A practising barrister must not knowingly deceive or mislead the Court.

10.31 A practising barrister must not devise facts to advance his client’s case.”

 

54.  只著眼當事人的福祉而犧牲法律公義並非一名法律從業員應有的操守，誤導法庭的行為違反專業操守和失德，程度嚴重的話實與欺詐無異。因此，本席認為，原審裁判官覆核刑期的決定並沒有犯上程序上的錯誤。"

 

Hong Kong Barrister Douglas Kwok has also brought the Bar into disrepute, as the above had been widely reported in the press.  See:

 

 

 

Please prosecute Hong Kong Barrister Douglas Kwok (郭憬憲大律師) of Wong Man Kit SC's Chambers for professional misconduct accordingly. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Formal Complaint Against Barrister Gary CC Lam (林展程大律師) of Des Voeux Chambers, 38/F, Gloucester Tower, The Landmark, Central, H.K.

I am lodging a formal complaint, as a member of the public, against Hong Kong Barrister  Gary CC Lam (林展程大律師) of Des Voeux Chambers, 38/F, Gloucester Tower, The Landmark, Central, H.K. ., for his blatant breach of  paragraphs 10.29 & 10.30 of the Bar Code , in that he has failed to act with candour and independence in the interests of justice, and  knowingly deceived or misled the Court , in his ex parte Court Application before  DHCJ MK Liu  on  18 February 2021.  Alternatively, he was incompetent in his professional activities, and breached   paragraphs 4.1 (d) of the Bar Code  in the same matter. The material facts had been set out in  [2021] HKCFI 836 ( HCMP 2178/2020)  -  https://legalref. judiciary.hk/lrs/common/ju/ju_ frame.jsp?DIS=134766&currpage= T   - where Coleman J said these about Barrister Gary CC Lam's conduct, behaviour and performance   in his ex parte Court Application before  DHCJ MK Liu  on  18 February 2021: - 1. If there were a prize to be awarded to t
Read more

Garden Chambers Barrister Dorothy Cheung Disgusting! 投訴香港大律師張曉惠!

Garden Chambers Barrister Dorothy Cheung Disgusting! 投訴香港大律師張曉惠! https://hklawyers2022.blogspot.com/2022/03/garden-chambers-barrister-dorothy.html This is a formal complaint against Hong Kong Barrister  Dorothy Cheung  (張曉惠大律師)  of Garden Chambers, 15/F, Printing House, Central, Hong Kong, for she had dishonestly or otherwise knowingly given false evidence under oath before Barnes J in HCCC 312/2017 [2018] HKCFI 2711, resulting in her being disbelieved by Barnes J.   Hong Kong Barrister  Dorothy Cheung had thereby acted in breach of  paragraph 4.1(b) of the Bar Code . This public judgment says it all: - https://legalref.judiciary.hk/ lrs/common/ju/ju_frame.jsp? DIS=119316&currpage=T 首被告陳強利（58歲、退休人士）今天透過代表大律師，申請暫毋須答辯，以待進一步索取控方未被使用文件；陳今天沒有保釋申請。控方則回應指，相關文件會在一星期內交給辯方。次被告張曉惠（33歲、大律師）的代表大律師則表示張已經準備好答辯，但得悉陳仍須索取文件，故保留答辯。法官高勁修問及張的意向，辯方透露張擬不認罪。控罪指，2名被告於2017年1月27日至2017年11月21日期間的若干日子，在香港與馬家健和其他人一同串謀妨礙司法公正，即就刑事案件TWCC 2496/2016，虛假地表示洪智謙沒有要求馬家健接收上述相關案件的郵包，以及聲稱洪智謙並不涉及於上述相關案件。 案件編號：DCCC 37/2022 htt
Read more

Complaint Against DVC Barristers Dr William Wong SC & Michael Lok - Double Booking Themselves & Knowingly Did Not Show Up In Court Without Prior Permission Of The Court - DHCJ Winnie Tsui - HCA 2562/2014 (Lau Wing Yan and Ors v Chu Kong and Ors)

Complaint Against DVC Barristers Dr William Wong SC & Michael Lok - Double Booking Themselves & Knowingly Did Not Show Up In Court Without Prior Permission Of The Court - DHCJ Winnie Tsui - HCA 2562/2014 (Lau Wing Yan and Ors v Chu Kong and Ors) I am lodging a formal complaint, as a member of the public, against Hong Kong Barristers Dr William Wong SC and Michael Lok of Des Voeux Chambers, 38/F, Gloucester Tower, The Landmark, Central, H.K.., for their blatant breach of  paragraphs 4.1(b)(ii), 4.1(b)(iii), 4.1(c) & 10.34 of the Bar Code , in that they had, when appearing before DHCJ Winnie Tsui in April 2021 as professional advocates for the trial of HCA 2562/2014 (Lau Wing Yan and Ors v Chu Kong and Ors), knowingly double-booked themselves, and then knowingly did not show up in court, without any prior approval of the court, and without even having first informed the court, thereby showing their utterly disgusting disrespect towards the court, resulting in their admission
Read more