趙文偉 對 趙文雄

趙文偉 對 趙文雄

The application for leave to appeal was refused because the proposed grounds amounted to impermissible re‑litigation of factual findings, did not raise any issue of general or public importance or other exceptional circumstances under s.22, and no arguable jurisdictional point had been properly pleaded; therefore...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] HKCA 330
Parties
Plaintiff: CHIU MAN WAI DAVID (趙文偉); Defendant: CHIU MAN HUNG (趙文雄)
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
9 April 2025
Case Number
CACV238/2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From High Court (court of First Instance) / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Final Appeal
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal refused; defendant's filed Notice of Motion struck out.
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Public Importance Threshold, Factual Findings Vs Points of Law, Jurisdiction Over Rates, Assessment of Costs, Rule on Exceptional Circumstances
Source Language
ch
Civil Procedure Appeal Law Jurisdictional Law Costs Law Property Rates Leave to Appeal Public Importance Threshold Factual Findings Vs Points of Law +3 more

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CHIU MAN WAI DAVID (趙文偉)

Plaintiff

CHIU MAN HUNG (趙文雄)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From High Court (court of First Instance) / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Final Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal should be granted under s.22 of the Court of Final Appeal Ordinance
  2. 2 Whether the proposed grounds raise issues of general or public importance or other exceptional reasons warranting transfer to the Court of Final Appeal
  3. 3 Whether the appellant's grievances are errors of fact or questions of law

Ratio Decidendi

The application for leave to appeal was refused because the proposed grounds amounted to impermissible re‑litigation of factual findings, did not raise any issue of general or public importance or other exceptional circumstances under s.22, and no arguable jurisdictional point had been properly pleaded; therefore there was no prospect of a proper appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal refused; defendant's filed Notice of Motion struck out.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal refused.
  • The defendant's filed 'Notice of Motion' is struck out.