A High Court judge who has been reprimanded for plagiarism will retire early, effective Friday.

Chief Justice Andrew Cheung said in order to safeguard public confidence in the administration of justice, he on Monday asked Wilson Chan to take early retirement from judicial office.

Chan submitted his retirement application which was approved by Cheung.

"A judge must exercise an independent judicial mind in carefully considering and resolving the issues raised and in determining the disputes before the court. The exercise of independent judicial judgment, which lies at the heart of the adjudicative process, is principally reflected in the reasons and judgments delivered by the judge," the chief justice said in a statement.

"Judicial copying strikes at the very core of this fundamental requirement.

"The public concern arising from the multiple instances of judicial copying involving Mr Justice Wilson Chan in recent years is fully recognised. The high standards expected by the community of both the Judiciary and individual judges are entirely justified.

"Notwithstanding the severe reprimand previously issued and the undertaking given by Mr Justice Chan to improve, judicial copying has continued to occur. A number of appeals have arisen over time, some of which have led to orders for retrial.

"Such conduct has not only adversely affected the interests of the parties concerned and imposed an unnecessary burden on appellate judicial resources, but has also undermined public confidence in Mr Justice Chan's continued ability to discharge his judicial responsibilities properly."

Cheung added that efforts were being made to prevent similar cases in future.

"Although these incidents of judicial copying relate to a single judge, I have taken this opportunity to remind judges and judicial officers at all levels of the court system of the importance of avoiding any form of judicial copying. Training in judgment writing will also be strengthened where appropriate," the statement read.

The Hong Kong Bar Association said in a statement that a published judgement, which demonstrates independent and impartial adjudication, is a well-established feature of the legal system.

Excessive judicial copying may undermine public confidence in the judiciary and result in judicial resources being wasted, the association said.

“It is recognised that excessive judicial copying may lead the parties and the public to harbour doubt as to whether the judge has independently considered the facts and issues requiring determination, and in some cases this may result in the need for a re-trial, which imposes an unfair burden on the parties involved and creates wastage of judicial resources. That would be at odds with the reasonable expectations of the public and would not be desirable,” the statement read.

The Bar Association said it remains confident the judiciary will continue to discharge its duty to ensure that justice is administered fairly, efficiently, and properly.
_____________________________
Last updated: 2026-07-27 HKT 22:06



Edited by Edmond Fong