Thread by @kevinkfyam

I have been given a lowdown on the hearing today. It seems like the judge was asking some really basic questions and the #HongKong Department of Justice was not ready to answer even the basics. I have never encountered a party seeking an injunction to be so ill prepared … (1/7)

https://twitter.com/karisoo1/status/1668158900473036800

… even by the standards of a first hearing. When you apply for an injunction (which is a remedy when you need something relatively urgently) you always prepare fairly comprehensive submissions and supporting affidavits even for a first hearing, so that you can be ready … (2/7)

… to seek an initial limited time period interim injunction straight away even if you’re not sure the court would necessarily agree with you. To get such an injunction means your papers to the court should already have all the basics answered (especially when … (3/7)

… an injunction applicant with no opponent in court has a duty of full and frank disclosure to the court). That those basics were not clearly answered before or at the hearing today such as to be ready to push for an injunction right away suggests (1) the #HongKong DoJ … (4/7)

… was pressured into the injunction application before it’s ready; and/or (2) the #HongKong DoJ lawyers handling it to date are clueless, slapdash and/or incompetent. Much as I don’t want to see the DoJ succeed, to hear of them failing even with the basics makes me … (5/7)

… embarrassed to consider myself a #HongKong civil litigator. I hope today’s proceedings isn’t another metaphor for HK sliding back into pre-1980s “near enough is good enough” mediocrity.

PS: interesting that 1st hearing today (June 12) and adjourned … (6/7)

…hearing date (July 21) are both major 2019 #HongKong protest anniversaries. God is laughing at the HK and CCP authorities cracking down on HK. (7/7)