ALL CHINA EXPRESS LTD v. KWOK CHEUK KIN AND OTHERS

ALL CHINA EXPRESS LTD v. KWOK CHEUK KIN AND OTHERS

The judge refused leave to appeal and refused a stay because the 2nd defendant failed to show a reasonable prospect of success or that it was in the interests of justice to re‑visit issues the Court of Appeal has already addressed; the triable issues threshold applies to interlocutory injunctions in these public obstruction cases and ACE has raised triable issues including evidence of particular, substantial and direct loss; accordingly leave and stay were refused and costs awarded to ACE.

Citation
ALL CHINA EXPRESS LTD v. KWOK CHEUK KIN AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiff: ACE; 2nd Defendant: Kwok Cheuk Kin; 3rd Defendant: Wong Ho Ming
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
5 December 2014
Case Number
HCA2223/2014
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Injunction; Application for Leave to Appeal and Stay of Execution Pending Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal and Stay Pending Appeal Following Grant of Interlocutory Injunction at First Instance
Legal Topics
Triable Issues Threshold Vs 'very Likely' Threshold, Particular Substantial and Direct Loss (standing), Leave to Appeal (reasonable Prospect/interest of Justice), Stay of Execution Pending Appeal, Legal Aid Taxation
Source Language
EN
Public Nuisance Injunctions Civil Procedure Appeals Costs Triable Issues Threshold Vs 'very Likely' Threshold Particular Substantial and Direct Loss (standing) Leave to Appeal (reasonable Prospect/interest of Justice) +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ACE

Plaintiff

Kwok Cheuk Kin

2nd Defendant

Wong Ho Ming

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Injunction; Application for Leave to Appeal and Stay of Execution Pending Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal and Stay Pending Appeal Following Grant of Interlocutory Injunction at First Instance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted to the 2nd defendant
  2. 2 Whether the correct threshold for interlocutory injunctions in these circumstances is the triable issues threshold or a higher 'very likely to succeed' threshold
  3. 3 Whether ACE has shown particular, substantial and direct loss sufficient to sustain a claim in public nuisance

Ratio Decidendi

The judge refused leave to appeal and refused a stay because the 2nd defendant failed to show a reasonable prospect of success or that it was in the interests of justice to re‑visit issues the Court of Appeal has already addressed; the triable issues threshold applies to interlocutory injunctions in these public obstruction cases and ACE has raised triable issues including evidence of particular, substantial and direct loss; accordingly leave and stay were refused and costs awarded to ACE.