A Hong Kong High Court judge has been ordered to retry a case after an appeal court found he copied nearly 95% of his judgment from the defendant's legal submissions.

A panel of three Court of Appeal judges in Hong Kong has ordered a retrial after finding that Mr. Justice Wilson Chan Ka-shun engaged in “impermissible judicial copying.” The court determined that nearly 95 percent of a 2024 judgment authored by Chan was lifted directly from the defendant’s closing submissions. This marks the second time Chan has been reprimanded for plagiarism in his judicial rulings.

Background of the Dispute

The original litigation involved a share dispute between Nam Tai Property founder Koo Ming-kown and his former brother-in-law, Charles Chu Chia-chin. The case concerned the sale of shares in Lully Corporation, which serves as the parent company of the firm formerly known as Nam Tai Electronics. Chan initially ruled in favor of the defendant, Chu.

Grounds for Appeal

Following the ruling, Koo and three other plaintiffs appealed the decision, alleging that the judge had copied extensive portions of the defense counsel’s arguments. The Court of Appeal panel emphasized that judicial integrity requires a judge to apply an “independent mind” to resolve legal issues. They noted that the standard for evaluating such copying is whether a “fair-minded observer” would conclude that the judge performed this independent analysis.