A Hong Kong High Court judge previously reprimanded for plagiarism has been found to have done so again, after an appeal court determined that almost 95 per cent of a previous judgment was lifted from the defendant’s counsel.In a ruling dated July 15, which came to light on Tuesday, a panel of three Court of Appeal judges found that Mr Justice Wilson Chan Ka-shun had engaged in “impermissible judicial copying” in a case he oversaw in 2024.The original case stemmed from a dispute between Nam Tai Property founder Koo Ming-kown and his former brother-in-law Charles Chu Chia-chin over the sale of shares in Lully Corporation, the parent company of the firm.
SRCSouth China Morning Post
LANGEN
LEANCenter-Right
WORDS111
ENT8
TUE · 2026-07-21 · 11:55 GMTBRIEF NSR-2026-0721-94635
NSR-2026-0721-94635News Report·EN·Legal & Judicial
Retrial ordered after Hong Kong judge caught plagiarising again in ruling
A Hong Kong High Court judge, Wilson Chan Ka-shun, has been found to have plagiarized again in a ruling. A panel of three Court of Appeal judges determined on July 15 that nearly 95 percent of a 2024 judgment overseen by Justice Chan was copied from the defendant's counsel.
Connor MycroftSouth China Morning PostFiled 2026-07-21 · 11:55 GMTLean · Center-RightRead · 1 min
South China Morning PostFIG 01
Reading time
1min
Word count
111words
Sources cited
0cited
Entities identified
8entities
Quality score
100%
§ 01
Briefing Summary
AI-generatedNEWSAR · AI
A Hong Kong High Court judge, Wilson Chan Ka-shun, has been found to have plagiarized again in a ruling. A panel of three Court of Appeal judges determined on July 15 that nearly 95 percent of a 2024 judgment overseen by Justice Chan was copied from the defendant's counsel. This constitutes "impermissible judicial copying." The original case involved a dispute between Nam Tai Property founder Koo Ming-kown and his former brother-in-law over share sales in Lully Corporation. Consequently, a retrial has been ordered. This marks a second instance of plagiarism for Justice Chan, who had been previously reprimanded for similar conduct.
Confidence 0.85Claims 4Entities 8
§ 02
Article analysis
Model · rule-basedFraming
Legal & Judicial
Human Interest
Tone
Measured
AI-assessed
CalmNeutralAlarmist
Factuality
0.90 / 1.00
Factual
LowHigh
Sources cited
0
No named sources
FewMany
§ 03
Key claims
4 extracted01
The original case involved a dispute between Nam Tai Property founder Koo Ming-kown and Charles Chu Chia-chin.
factual
Confidence
1.00
02
Mr Justice Wilson Chan Ka-shun engaged in “impermissible judicial copying” in a 2024 case.
factualCourt of Appeal judges
Confidence
1.00
03
Almost 95 per cent of a previous judgment was lifted from the defendant’s counsel.
statisticCourt of Appeal judges
Confidence
1.00
04
A Hong Kong High Court judge has been found to have plagiarised again in a ruling.
factual
Confidence
1.00
§ 04
Full report
1 min read · 111 words§ 05
Entities
8 identifiedKey playerOppositionContextPositiveNeutralNegative
People3
Organizations4
Locations1
§ 06
Keywords & salience
5 termsjudicial copying
0.90
judicial misconduct
0.90
court appeal
0.80
plagiarism in law
0.80
hong kong judiciary
0.70
§ 07
Topic connections
Interactive graph No topic relationship data available yet. This graph will appear once topic relationships have been computed.