林馬光 對 警務處及積金局

林馬光 對 警務處及積金局

The application for leave to appeal under s.22(1)(b) was dismissed because the applicant failed to demonstrate that the appeal raised questions of great general or public importance; the court exercised its discretion to order the applicant to pay the respondents' costs of the appeal, and made no costs order in...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] HKCA 896
Parties
Applicant: 林馬光; First Defendant: 警務處長; Second Defendant: 積金局
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
26 November 2018
Case Number
CACV66/2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Final Appeal Under S.22(1)(b) of the Court of Final Appeal Ordinance
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal dismissed; costs of the appeal ordered against the applicant; no costs ordered in respect of the leave application due to respondents' non-response.
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Public Importance, Costs Orders
Source Language
ch
Civil Procedure Appeals Costs Leave to Appeal Public Importance Costs Orders

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

林馬光

Applicant

警務處長

First Defendant

積金局

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Final Appeal Under S.22(1)(b) of the Court of Final Appeal Ordinance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant demonstrated that the appeal raised questions of great general or public importance under s.22(1)(b) of the Court of Final Appeal Ordinance
  2. 2 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to make a costs order against the applicant

Ratio Decidendi

The application for leave to appeal under s.22(1)(b) was dismissed because the applicant failed to demonstrate that the appeal raised questions of great general or public importance; the court exercised its discretion to order the applicant to pay the respondents' costs of the appeal, and made no costs order in relation to the leave application because the respondents did not respond.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal dismissed; costs of the appeal ordered against the applicant; no costs ordered in respect of the leave application due to respondents' non-response.

Orders

  • Application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal dismissed
  • Applicant ordered to pay the respondents' costs of this appeal