CHAN LAI SHING 對 AMERICAN EXPRESS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
Because the appeal was not properly before the Court of Appeal (it should have been brought to the trial judge), and because the appellant agreed to revoke the notice while the respondent did not oppose and consented to no order as to costs, the correct disposition was to revoke the notice of appeal and make no...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] HKCA 572
- Parties
- Appellant: CHAN LAI SHING; Respondent: AMERICAN EXPRESS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Hong Kong
- Judgment Date
- 25 June 2024
- Case Number
- CACV72/2024
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Notice of Appeal Filed to Court of Appeal; Registrar/judicial Officer Directed Appeal Should Have Been to Trial Judge; Appellant Applied to Withdraw; Court Revoked Notice of Appeal
- Outcome
- Notice of appeal dated 28 February 2024 revoked
- Legal Topics
- Withdrawal/revocation of Appeal, Proper Forum/venue for Appeal, Costs Orders
- 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
CHAN LAI SHING
Appellant
AMERICAN EXPRESS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Notice of Appeal Filed to Court of Appeal; Registrar/judicial Officer Directed Appeal Should Have Been to Trial Judge; Appellant Applied to Withdraw; Court Revoked Notice of Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant's notice of appeal was filed to the correct court/bench
- 2 Whether the appellant could withdraw the notice and obtain refund of filing fee
- 3 Whether the court should order costs in relation to the revocation
Ratio Decidendi
Because the appeal was not properly before the Court of Appeal (it should have been brought to the trial judge), and because the appellant agreed to revoke the notice while the respondent did not oppose and consented to no order as to costs, the correct disposition was to revoke the notice of appeal and make no order as to costs.
Court Disposition
Notice of appeal dated 28 February 2024 revoked
Orders
- Revocation of the notice of appeal filed on 28 February 2024
- No order as to costs
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
CACV 72/2024 [2024] HKCA 572 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2024年第72號 （原高等法院民事訴訟2023年第849號） 原告人 CHAN LAI SHING 及 被告人 AMERICAN EXPRESS INTERNATIONAL, INC. 主審法官： 高等法院上訴法庭副庭長關淑馨 高等法院上訴法庭法官區慶祥 判案書日期： 2024年6月25日 判 案 書 由上訴法庭副庭長關淑馨頒發上訴法庭判案書: 原告人在2024年2月28日存檔上訴通知書，就高等法院聆案官葉樹培在2024年2月5日作出的剔除原告人的傳訊令狀及申索書的命令，向上訴法庭提出上訴。 於2024年3月5日，民事上訴司法常務官何志賢作出指示，指出原告人就該聆案官命令的上訴須向原訟法庭法官提出，而非向上訴法庭提出，他的上訴通知書應被剔除，倘若他有異議，可於3月28日或之前，呈交書面陳詞闡述反對理由。 原告人在2024年3月28日送交法庭的信函中，申請撤回上訴通知書，並申請退回存檔上訴通知書的費用。 民事上訴司法常務官何志賢於2024年4月15日作出進一步指示，拒絕接納原告人退回上訴費用的要求，並表明上訴法庭一般會把上訴人的上訴通知書撤銷，而不是批准撤回，同時指出上訴人需要參閲《高等法院規則》，原告人所指的小冊子只是作一般參考用途，而且原告人的上訴案件性質，並不屬於該小冊子所指可直接向上訴法庭提出上訴的案件類別。司法常務官指示原告人向法庭確認是否同意上訴庭撤銷他的上訴通知書，並指示被告人代表律師告知法庭，是否會就原告人的撤銷申請提出反對，及會否提出訟費申請或同意不作訟費命令。 被告人的代表律師在2024年4月24日的信函中，表示對撤銷上訴通知書的申請沒有異議，並同意不作訟費命令。 在原告人同意及被告人不反對撤銷上訴通知書的情況下，本庭撤銷原告人在2024年2月28日存檔的上訴通知書，不作訟費命令。 （關淑馨） 高等法院上訴法庭副庭長 （區慶祥） 高等法院上訴法庭法官 原告人：無律師代表，親自行事 被告人：由金杜律師事務所代表