Charles Ching
British colonial judge (1935-2000)
Charles Arthur Ching (Chinese: 沈澄, 7 October 1935–30 November 2000) was a judge in Hong Kong.
Born Charles Arthur Ching into an intellectual family in Hong Kong, Ching was educated in Hong Kong and England. He was a scholar both at King's College, Taunton and at University College, Oxford, where he graduated with honours in jurisprudence.
After passing his bar exam in 1959, Ching commenced his practice of law in Hong Kong, and was appointed Queen's Counsel in 1974. During this period, he was regarded by some as the most successful barrister in Hong Kong's history.
Ching was later appointed to the Court of Appeal in 1995 and the Court of Final Appeal in 1997, where he served with distinction. He resigned in 2000 for health reasons and died soon after. A scholarship named after him was set up by the Hong Kong Bar Association. Throughout his career both as advocate and as judge Mr. Justice Ching was an advocate for the merging of the legal professions in Hong Kong (barristers and solicitors).
“Charles Ching” enters the record as british colonial judge (1935-2000). Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Charles, Ching and British can confirm, complicate or overturn.
Why this record matters
“Charles Ching” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Charles, Ching and British provides the most credible route into that argument.
Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated Apr 24, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q5076230. 1 of 1 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 1935, 2000, 1959 and 1974.
Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Charles Ching”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Charles Ching primary sources, Charles Ching archive and Charles research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Charles Ching”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Charles Ching” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.