High Court judge to be reprimanded again for plagiarism as Judiciary flags ‘substantial’ copying

A High Court judge with a history of plagiarism will be reprimanded for yet another incident in which he copied large parts of a party’s submissions into his judgement.

The Judiciary said in a reply to HKFP on Wednesday that High Court Judge Wilson Chan will receive a “serious reprimand” from Chief Justice Andrew Cheung and Chief Judge of the High Court Jeremy Poon over the judicial copying case

The Judiciary said judges should “exercise their judicial function independently and professionally” and demonstrate fairness and justice.

“If a judge excessively copies a party’s submissions when writing the judgment in an individual case, it will inevitably give rise to doubts as to whether the judge has applied an independent mind in addressing the facts and issues to be determined,” the Judiciary added.

The statement came after local media reported on Monday that Chan was accused by the plaintiff of lifting the defendant’s opening and closing arguments when writing a judgement for a trial in 2024, prompting a retrial to be ordered. Those paragraphs comprised 95 per cent of the judgement.

It is not the first time Chan has been caught plagiarising. On two earlier occasions in 2023, the Court of Appeal ordered cases Chan handled to undergo a retrial, and Chief Justice Cheung issued a “serious reprimand.”

“As Mr Justice Wilson Chan’s judgment in the present case involved again a substantial amount of judicial copying, the Chief Justice of the Court of Final Appeal and the Chief Judge of the High Court will issue serious reprimand to Mr Justice Wilson Chan again regarding the matter and request him to undertake targeted training,” the Judiciary said.

‘An attitude problem’

Speaking in a Commercial Radio interview on Wednesday, government advisor and barrister Ronny Tong said Chan’s copying had affected the reputation of Hong Kong’s judicial system.

He explained that judges are required to cite arguments presented by both parties in a lawsuit. “However, citing arguments is not as simple as just copying,” he said in Cantonese.

“We must demonstrate the extent to which we understand the arguments and whether we comprehend the statements made by both sides. The repeated occurrence of individual cases without correction or improvement will indeed affect perceptions of the quality of Hong Kong’s judicial system,” Tong said.

Tong also said that the threshold for invoking a provision in the Basic Law to remove a judge from office was “quite high,” adding that he would respect the Chief Justice’s decision while hoping the Judiciary considers public opinion.

“I don’t think this is a training issue, because it’s a basic requirement for judges. Every judge should know how to handle the arguments of both sides in a case. If they can’t even grasp the most basic requirements, it might be an attitude problem, not something that training can fix,” he said.