CTEA 1/2022

[2023] HKCT 3

IN THE COMPETITION TRIBUNAL OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COMPETITION TRIBUNAL ENFORCEMENT ACTION NO 1 OF 2022

________________

________________

________________

D E C I S I O N

________________

1. On 10 March 2023 the 4 ^th Respondent issued an ex parte summons seeking an order that “ The 4 ^th Respondent do have leave to be represented at the trial of the action listed for 29 November 2023 by a solicitor David Nigel Francis ”. The margin note refers to Competition Tribunal Rule 30(1)(b)(ii). Rule 30 deals with the “Right of Audience” before the Tribunal and is in the following terms:

“ 30. Right of audience

(1) In any proceedings, a party—

(a) subject to subrule (2), may appear in person and be heard; or

(b) may be represented by—

(i) a counsel or solicitor having a right of audience before the CFI in its civil jurisdiction; or

(ii) any other person allowed with the leave of the Tribunal to appear on the party’s behalf.”

2. Sub-rule (2) has no application as it only deals with a body corporate which intends to be represented by one of its directors and the sub-rule provides that Order 5 rule 6 and Order 12 of the Rules of the High Court apply in such circumstances.

3. The meaning of Sub-rule (1)(b) is in my view quite clear: a party in any proceedings before the Tribunal may be represented by a ( A ) counsel or ( B ) a solicitor having a right of audience before the Court of First Instance (“ CFI ”) in its civil jurisdiction or ( C ) a person other than counsel or a solicitor with a right of audience before the CFI in its civil jurisdiction (emphasis added). This mirrors the position in respect of hearings in open court before the CFI, which is what one would expect particularly given the provisions of section 144(1) of the Competition Ordinance , Cap. 619 , which provides “