CHEUNG CHIU HON 對 HAN YAN TAO (also known as HON YAN TAO)

CHEUNG CHIU HON 對 HAN YAN TAO (also known as HON YAN TAO)

Section 63B of the District Court Ordinance bars appeals against the Court of Appeal's decision on whether to grant leave to appeal; therefore the defendant's subsequent motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal was impermissible and must be dismissed, with costs to the respondent.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] HKCA 406
Parties
Plaintiff: Cheung Chiu Hon (張超翰); Defendant: Han Yan Tao (韓欣陶) aka Hon Yan Tao
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
4 June 2020
Case Number
CAMP63/2018
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal to the Court of Final Appeal / Motion for Permission to Appeal to the Court of Final Appeal Filed After the Court of Appeal Had Refused Leave
Outcome
Defendant's motion dismissed and struck out; costs awarded to plaintiff
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Finality of Appellate Decisions, Statutory Bar on Appeal Under S63 B, Costs Assessment
Source Language
ch
Civil Procedure Appeals Court Jurisdiction Costs Leave to Appeal Finality of Appellate Decisions Statutory Bar on Appeal Under S63 B Costs Assessment

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cheung Chiu Hon (張超翰)

Plaintiff

Han Yan Tao (韓欣陶) aka Hon Yan Tao

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal to the Court of Final Appeal / Motion for Permission to Appeal to the Court of Final Appeal Filed After the Court of Appeal Had Refused Leave

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court of Appeal could entertain or grant permission to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal after it had earlier refused leave
  2. 2 Whether the defendant's motion filed on 27 December 2019 was competent in light of the statutory bar
  3. 3 Whether costs should be awarded for the motion and the appropriate amount

Ratio Decidendi

Section 63B of the District Court Ordinance bars appeals against the Court of Appeal's decision on whether to grant leave to appeal; therefore the defendant's subsequent motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal was impermissible and must be dismissed, with costs to the respondent.

Court Disposition

Defendant's motion dismissed and struck out; costs awarded to plaintiff

Orders

  • The motion notice filed by the defendant on 27 December 2019 is struck out and removed from the file
  • Defendant to pay the plaintiff's costs of the motion, assessed at HK$15,000