Hong Kong authorities have suffered a legal setback in their plan to build 12,000 public housing units on part of the city’s oldest golf course in Fanling, after the Court of Appeal upheld a ruling overturning conditional approval for the development. The judgment, delivered this week, found fault with the government’s handling of the environmental impact assessment (EIA) process, citing procedural unfairness, improper conditions imposed on approval, and insufficient attention to wildlife conservation and cultural heritage concerns.

The project involves developing 9.5 hectares of a 32-hectare tract previously reclaimed by the government from the 172-hectare Hong Kong Golf Club course. The plans anticipated completion by 2029 as part of efforts to address the city’s short-term public housing shortage. However, the court’s decision is expected to prompt renewed public consultations and may delay progress.

The controversy centers on the government’s approval of an EIA report conducted by the Civil Engineering and Development Department, which was challenged by the Hong Kong Golf Club. In a 2024 judicial review, the Court of First Instance ruled the government failed to properly consult the public on additional ecological data introduced late in the process. It also found that the director of environmental protection imposed excessive conditions on the report’s final approval, effectively undermining its validity by requiring significant revisions to project plans.

Government lawyers argued that recent amendments to the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance had reduced the scope of mandatory assessments for smaller developments, contending the legal challenge was moot. The ordinance now requires EIAs only for projects covering at least 50 hectares, amended from the previous 20-hectare threshold. Advocating for the government, Senior Counsel Rimsky Yuen maintained that the revised regulations permitted proceeding without a full environmental assessment.

The appellate court rejected this argument, ruling that ongoing assessments initiated before the legal changes remained subject to review and that the environmental report retained relevance for future decision-making. Judges emphasized that the government’s failure to re-engage the public on additional environmental information rendered the consultation process unfair. They also upheld findings that the imposed approval conditions were impermissible and that the EIA did not adequately address the project’s impact on the site’s ecology and historic trees designated as "old and valuable."

The Hong Kong Golf Club welcomed the ruling, describing the course as a significant part of the city’s living heritage and expressing a commitment to continued dialogue with the government. A club spokesperson said they hoped to preserve the Old Course while maximizing the facility’s value in alignment with policies promoting golf and sports tourism.

In response, the government said it would review the judgment to determine the next steps, including whether to pursue a further appeal, with announcements to be made in due course.