CHIEF Justice Andrew Li Kwok-nang has recently been heard to complain in private that the Government never gave him any real warning of the scale of the social consequences of his landmark right-of-abode judgment earlier this year.
After the ruling, officials estimated it could open the floodgates to an influx of up to 1.67 million migrants. They used this to justify the controversial decision to seek a reinterpretation of the Basic Law from the National People's Congress Standing Committee. This, in effect, over-ruled the judgment.
But the fact that these alarming figures were never presented by government lawyers during the court case is apparently the cause of Mr Li's unhappiness.
That does not necessarily mean he and his fellow judges would have ruled any differently had they been given such information at the time. Courts make their decisions based on the law, although it is naive to suggest they are immune to the social consequences.
Nonetheless, his private complaint is of particular interest as Hong Kong's highest court gears up for two controversial cases. Just over a week from now, it will hear arguments over the legality of the reinterpretation of the Basic Law, in an appeal involving mainland 'overstayers' anxious to avoid deportation.
Before that, starting on Wednesday, comes a potentially even more explosive case: the Government is appealing against the overturning of the convictions of two young men who desecrated the national flag last year.