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

A High Court judge in Hong Kong is set to receive a serious reprimand for alleged plagiarism, marking the latest incident in a pattern of misconduct that has drawn criticism.

“

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.

High Court Judge Wilson Chan will be reprimanded by Chief Justice Andrew Cheung and Chief Judge Jeremy Poon for copying a significant portion of a party's submissions into his judgment. The Judiciary confirmed that the judge's actions could undermine public confidence in the independence and fairness of the judicial system.

This latest accusation follows two previous instances in 2023 where appellate courts ordered retrials in cases handled by Chan due to plagiarism. Chief Justice Cheung had issued a serious reprimand on those occasions as well. The Judiciary stated that Chan's judgment in the current case involved a "substantial amount of judicial copying," prompting the need for targeted training.

“

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.

Government advisor and barrister Ronny Tong commented that Chan's repeated plagiarism affects the reputation of Hong Kong's judicial system. He explained that while judges must cite arguments from both sides, simply copying them without proper analysis demonstrates a lack of independent thought. Tong suggested that the repeated occurrences indicate a potential "attitude problem" rather than a mere training issue, though he acknowledged the high threshold for removing a judge from office.

“

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 a