Hong Kong’s legal profession is entering a new era of digital transformation following the full implementation of the Courts (Remote Hearing) Ordinance (Cap. 654) on 28 March 2025. The ordinance formally establishes a legal framework for the use of remote hearings across all levels of courts and tribunals, broadening access to virtual proceedings, especially for non-trial and procedural criminal matters.
Under the new law, courts can now order proceedings to be conducted via remote means such as telephone or live audio-visual links, particularly in civil cases and non-trial criminal hearings like case management conferences and pre-trial reviews. The move reflects the judiciary’s growing commitment to efficiency and modernisation, while maintaining safeguards to ensure the integrity and fairness of the justice process.
Jennifer Wu, a legal expert in technology, media and telecommunications (TMT) and commercial disputes at Pinsent Masons, said the shift signals a new set of essential skills for legal professionals. “As remote hearings become more common, adaptability and technological proficiencies are no longer optional — they are essential skills for modern legal practice,” Wu noted. “Legal practitioners must be prepared to operate flexibly on digital platforms and be comfortable with all virtual courtroom etiquette.”
In deciding whether to permit a remote hearing, courts must assess the case’s nature, complexity, urgency, type of evidence, views of involved parties, and whether participants can effectively follow and engage in proceedings. Additional considerations include any impairments or special circumstances and the need for a fair and efficient resolution.
To ensure transparency, courts are required to maintain public access to remote hearings where appropriate, including through live broadcasts. The ordinance also introduces criminal offences for the unauthorised recording, publishing or broadcasting of proceedings—both physical and virtual—to protect the legal process.
Where there is doubt about the reliability of remote testimony, the court retains the authority to revoke remote hearing orders and require in-person attendance. Wu emphasised the importance of preparation: “Effective preparation is crucial to ensure smooth and efficient remote hearings. Parties are encouraged to liaise with the court on logistics, address technical questions, and do equipment test runs prior to the hearing.”
Participants must ensure all necessary equipment, including video conferencing units, microphones, speakers and cameras, are in working order and connected securely to the court’s video conferencing platform. “Choose a quiet, well-lit and private location free from interruptions,” Wu advised, adding that VC links must not be shared publicly and public Wi-Fi should be avoided for security reasons.
She also stressed the need for clear communication and guidance for all participants, including instructions on how to access hearings, what to expect, and how to give evidence virtually. “Educating participants and preparing them in advance ensures hearings run efficiently and without unnecessary delay,” Wu said.
The ordinance marks a significant evolution in Hong Kong’s judicial system, where digital competence is now fundamental to effective legal practice. As remote hearings become increasingly embedded, the legal community is urged to embrace the change with both professionalism and technical readiness.
