This file photo dated Aug 17, 2017 shows the High Court building in Hong Kong. (PHOTO / AFP)

The High Court on Thursday ordered Jimmy Lai Chee-ying to pay all litigation costs associated with Lai’s unsuccessful challenges to a government panel’s recommendation not to grant a work visa to an overseas lawyer Lai had invited to represent him in national security trials. 

In a written judgment by High Court Chief Justice Jeremy Poon Shiu-chor, the judge called the former media tycoon’s two legal challenges “wholly unmeritorious” and said they failed to raise “important issues of law with immerse public interest”.

More importantly, Lai persisted in his legal attempts despite being cautioned by the Department of Justice, in a letter dated April 13, that indemnity costs would be sought against him if he pursued the litigation despite his cases’ “lack of merits”.

“The applicants should have acted on the advice but unreasonably persisted,” the judgment said.

In a written judgment by High Court Chief Justice Jeremy Poon Shiu-chor, the judge called former media tycoon Jimmy Lai Chee-ying’s two legal challenges “wholly unmeritorious” and said they failed to raise “important issues of law with immerse public interest”

The judge ruled that Lai’s persistence in both cases is “unreasonable litigation conduct, justifying an order for indemnity costs”, with the exact amount yet to be determined.

Lai faces four charges under the National Security Law for Hong Kong, including colluding with foreign forces to endanger national security. His trial, which is expected to last 40 days, is scheduled to begin on Sept 25.

ALSO READ: HK court upholds decision to bar UK lawyer from Jimmy Lai trial

Lai applied to the court to let him hire London-based barrister Timothy Owen KC. The Hong Kong High Court granted the application in October, a decision later upheld by the Court of Appeal and the Court of Final Appeal.

The special administrative region government later sought an interpretation from the National People’s Congress Standing Committee on whether the city should allow foreign lawyers to get involved in national security cases. The NPCSC on Dec 30 issued an interpretation saying the Committee for Safeguarding National Security of HKSAR shall perform its duties to make decisions on such circumstances if the city’s chief executive does not certify such a question. 

The Hong Kong committee subsequently said it would advise the Immigration Department not to approve Owen’s work visa.

In the new judgment, Poon emphasized that the National Security Law for Hong Kong explicitly states that decisions made by the Committee for Safeguarding National Security of HKSAR are exempt from judicial review

On Feb 17, Lai argued that the NPCSC’s interpretation doesn’t affect the earlier Hong Kong court decisions to allow Owen to represent him. 

In April, he also sought a judicial review of the Committee for Safeguarding National Security of HKSAR’s advice to deny Owen a working visa and the corresponding decision of the immigration director.

READ MORE: Officials slam UK interference in Lai's case

On May 19, the High Court ruled against Lai in both legal bids.

In the new judgment, Poon emphasized that the National Security Law for Hong Kong explicitly states that decisions made by the Committee for Safeguarding National Security of HKSAR are exempt from judicial review.

Poon said Lai’s application for judicial review lacked any valid grounds and misinterpreted the content of the NPC Standing Committee’s interpretation.