WOO TAK YAN v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE

WOO TAK YAN v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed because the grounds raised questions of fact and credibility not law; the Deputy Adjudicator properly investigated and made factual findings that EPD acted reasonably, attempted to return the belongings, and acted as an involuntary bailee, so there was no conversion or trespass; there was no legal error, procedural unfairness or apparent bias, and the appeal had no reasonable prospect of success.

Citation
[2025] HKCFI 664
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Woo Tak Yan; Defendant/respondent: Secretary for Justice
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
17 February 2025
Case Number
HCSA67/2024
Procedural Posture
Small Claims Tribunal Appeal to Court of First Instance / Application for Leave to Appeal (dismissed)
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Conversion, Trespass to Goods, Involuntary Bailment, Appeal on Question of Law, Apparent Bias, Case Management, Costs
Source Language
EN
Tort Civil Procedure Administrative Law Conversion Trespass to Goods Involuntary Bailment Appeal on Question of Law Apparent Bias +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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Woo Tak Yan

Claimant/appellant

Secretary for Justice

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Small Claims Tribunal Appeal to Court of First Instance / Application for Leave to Appeal (dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendant/EPD was liable for conversion of the Claimant's belongings
  2. 2 Whether the Defendant/EPD committed trespass to goods by relocating belongings
  3. 3 Whether EPD acted as an involuntary bailee and was excused from liability

Ratio Decidendi

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed because the grounds raised questions of fact and credibility not law; the Deputy Adjudicator properly investigated and made factual findings that EPD acted reasonably, attempted to return the belongings, and acted as an involuntary bailee, so there was no conversion or trespass; there was no legal error, procedural unfairness or apparent bias, and the appeal had no reasonable prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Application for leave to appeal dismissed
  • No order as to costs