Court of Appeal upholds ruling against gov’t over Fanling golf course housing plan

Hong Kong’s appeals court has ruled against the government in a legal challenge connected with plans to build public housing on a golf course in Fanling.

Fanling golf course. Photo: Wikicommons.

The Court of Appeal handed down the verdict on Monday, upholding a lower court’s earlier judgement.

In 2024, a judge sided with the Hong Kong Golf Club, which lodged a judicial review on the grounds that the government had not acted in accordance with the law when it approved an environmental report required for the public housing project.

Judicial reviews are considered by the Court of First Instance and examine the decision-making processes of administrative bodies. Matters under review must be shown to affect the wider public interest.

In the latest verdict, a three-judge Court of Appeal panel emphasised that the proceedings were not about the authorities’ decision to reclaim the golf club’s land and build homes, but rather about the project’s Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA).

Hong Kong’s High Court. Photo: Kyle Lam/HKFP.

EIAs evaluate the likely ecological effects of major development projects. They are submitted on behalf of the Civil Engineering and Development Department (CEDD) and considered for approval by the Director of Environmental Protection, who leads the Environmental Protection Department (EPD).

In its 2023 judicial review, the Hong Kong Golf Club challenged the approval of the housing project’s EIA, arguing that there was a lack of public consultation and a failure to account for ecological concerns.

The High Court ruled in favour of the club, handing the government a defeat.

Judge Russell Coleman agreed with the club that authorities should have reopened the project to public consultation after the CEDD submitted additional information to the EIA, including surveys on affected bird and moth populations.

‘Unfairness’

In Monday’s verdict, the Court of Appeal judges said there was “unfairness” in the consultation process.

The Fanling Golf Course. Photo: Kyle Lam/HKFP.

“[The new information]… was material that ought to have been but was not included in the EIA report for public inspection,” the judgement read.

“The failure to remedy this deficiency by holding a further consultation meant that there was unfairness in the consultation overall,” it added.

In approving the report, environmental authorities also did not consider the golf club’s response to the additional information, the judgement read.

The government project was intended to provide housing for 33,600 residents on a 9.5-hectare plot of the Fanling golf course – part of a larger 32-hectare plot that has been returned to the government.

After the court ruled in favour of the club in its judicial review, the Development Bureau said this decision would have a “substantial impact” on yield and completion dates for Hong Kong’s housing goals.