陳海瀅 對 香淑嫻
Leave to appeal refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate under s22(1) CFAO that the appeal involves matters of great and wide importance or of public importance and did not raise such issues in the notice of motion or written submissions.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 陳海瀅 對 香淑嫻
- Parties
- Appellant: 陳海瀅; Respondent: 香淑嫻
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Hong Kong
- Judgment Date
- 29 September 2016
- Case Number
- CACV18/2015
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal — Application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Final Appeal / Leave Application (permission to Appeal Under S22(1) Cfao)
- Outcome
- Application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal refused.
- Legal Topics
- Leave to Appeal, Permission to Appeal, Public Importance, Jurisdiction of Final Court
- Source Language
- ch
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
陳海瀅
Appellant
香淑嫻
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal — Application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Final Appeal / Leave Application (permission to Appeal Under S22(1) Cfao)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant demonstrated that the proposed appeal involves matters of great and wide importance or of public importance or should for other reasons be determined by the Court of Final Appeal under s22(1) of the Court of Final Appeal Ordinance
Ratio Decidendi
Leave to appeal refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate under s22(1) CFAO that the appeal involves matters of great and wide importance or of public importance and did not raise such issues in the notice of motion or written submissions.
Court Disposition
Application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal refused.
Orders
- Application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal refused.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
CACV 18/2015 香港特別行政區 高等法院上訴法庭 民事司法管轄權 民事上訴 民事上訴案件 2015 年第 18 號 (原高等法院憲法及行政訴訟2014年第142號) 申請人 （上訴人） 陳海瀅 與 指認答辯人 （答辯人） 香淑嫻 審理法官： 高等法院上訴法庭法官張澤祐 高等法院上訴法庭法官關淑馨 高等法院原訟法庭法官黃崇厚 書面陳詞日期：2016年8月29日及9月5日 判決書日期：2016年9月29日 判決書 上訴法庭法官張澤祐頒發上訴法庭判決書： 申請人就本庭 2016 年 7 月 25 日的判決申請許可，讓她向終審法院提出上訴。根據《香港終審法院條例》（香港法例第 484 章）第 22(1) 條，申請人必須證明其上訴所涉及的問題具有重大廣泛的或關乎公眾的重要性，或因其他理由，以致應交由終審法院裁決，才可以獲得上訴許可。 申請人並沒有在其「提出動議通知書」或其書面陳詞提出任何涉及重大廣泛或關乎公眾的重要性，或因其他理由，以致應交由終審法院裁決的議題。在這情況下，本庭拒絕申請。 （張澤祐） 高等法院上訴法庭 法官 （關淑馨） 高等法院上訴法庭 法官 （黃崇厚） 高等法院原訟法庭法官 申請人：無律師代表，親自行事。