The Court of Appeal handed down a judgment in respect of the appeals of the first defendant (“D1”) and the second defendant (“D2”) against conviction and sentence for manslaughter by gross negligence. In doing so, the Court of Appeal refused the applications by D1 and D2 for leave to appeal against their conviction and dismissed their appeals against conviction but granted leave to appeal against sentence and allowed their appeals against sentence.
This was an application by D1 only to certify five points of law of great and general importance, which were said to be involved in the Court of Appeal decision above, pursuant to section 32(2) of the Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap 484).
Section 32(2) provided that “[l]eave to appeal shall not be granted unless it is certified by the Court of Appeal … that a point of law of great and general importance is involved in the decision or ...”
Facts
The deceased, CHAN Yuen Lam, underwent a therapy treatment known as Cytokines Induced Killer cells (“CIK”) treatment launched by the DR Group. The “CIK” treatment involved the extraction, manipulation in a laboratory and reintroduction of blood taken. The deceased’s blood was extracted from her at a clinic of the DR Group and was processed at a laboratory called APSC. Unfortunately, the blood became contaminated during the processing stage and the contaminated blood was infused back into the body of the deceased, causing her death.
The prosecution alleged that D1, the person in charge of the DR Group, D2, “the person in charge of APSC who processed the blood in question" and the third defendant (D3), the doctor who administered the contaminated blood product to the deceased, were liable for manslaughter by gross negligence. All three defendants were convicted.
Points of law