項志蓉 對 鍾毅傑 (the executor of the Estate of 鍾鴻昌，Deceased)

項志蓉 對 鍾毅傑 (the executor of the Estate of 鍾鴻昌，Deceased)

The Court exercised its discretion to refuse leave to appeal because the appellant, being bankrupt, had no legal capacity to prosecute the appeal absent assignment by the trustee and the appellant failed to identify any question of great general or public importance under s22(1)(b) or any other reason warranting...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
項志蓉 對 鍾毅傑 (the executor of the Estate of 鍾鴻昌，Deceased)
Parties
Respondent: HONG CHI YUNG (項志蓉); Appellant: CHUNG NGAI KIT (鍾毅傑) (executor of the Estate of CHUNG HUNG CHONG)
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
22 September 2017
Case Number
CACV223/2016
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Final Appeal
Legal Topics
Legal Capacity to Appeal, Transfer of Appeal Rights by Trustee in Bankruptcy, Leave to Appeal to Court of Final Appeal Under S22(1)(b), Costs Assessment
Source Language
ch
Civil Procedure Bankruptcy Appeal Jurisdiction Legal Capacity to Appeal Transfer of Appeal Rights by Trustee in Bankruptcy Leave to Appeal to Court of Final Appeal Under S22(1)(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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HONG CHI YUNG (項志蓉)

Respondent

CHUNG NGAI KIT (鍾毅傑) (executor of the Estate of CHUNG HUNG CHONG)

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Final Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a bankrupt appellant without assignment from the trustee has legal capacity to prosecute an appeal
  2. 2 Whether the proposed appeal raises a question of great general or public importance under s22(1)(b) of the Court of Final Appeal Ordinance
  3. 3 Whether there are other reasons justifying leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The Court exercised its discretion to refuse leave to appeal because the appellant, being bankrupt, had no legal capacity to prosecute the appeal absent assignment by the trustee and the appellant failed to identify any question of great general or public importance under s22(1)(b) or any other reason warranting referral to the Court of Final Appeal; costs were ordered from the bankrupt estate and quantified by the Court.