東盈投資有限公司 對 陳寶榮

東盈投資有限公司 對 陳寶榮

The application for leave to appeal was refused because the proposed appeal did not raise any question of public or general importance under s22(1)(b) Cap.484 and was a re‑petition of issues already finally decided (res judicata/issue estoppel), had no realistic prospect of success, and there was no other reason to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] HKCA 486
Parties
Plaintiff: Gain East Investments Limited; Defendant: Chan Po Wing
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
28 May 2024
Case Number
CACV465/2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Final Appeal (leave to Appeal Application)
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal refused; notice of motion withdrawn/cancelled
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Res Judicata, Issue Estoppel, Disclosure of Documents, Money Lenders Ordinance (cap.163)
Source Language
ch
Civil Procedure Land Law Mortgage Law Appeal Law Costs Leave to Appeal Res Judicata Issue Estoppel +2 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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gain East Investments Limited

Plaintiff

Chan Po Wing

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Final Appeal (leave to Appeal Application)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the proposed appeal raises a matter of public or general importance under s22(1)(b) Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap.484)
  2. 2 Whether the defendant's grounds are merely a re‑litigation of issues already finally determined (res judicata/issue estoppel)
  3. 3 Whether the defendant's factual allegations (repayment, alleged Money Lenders Ordinance breach, non‑disclosure of cheque) constitute fresh, arguable grounds warranting leave

Ratio Decidendi

The application for leave to appeal was refused because the proposed appeal did not raise any question of public or general importance under s22(1)(b) Cap.484 and was a re‑petition of issues already finally decided (res judicata/issue estoppel), had no realistic prospect of success, and there was no other reason to refer the matter to the Court of Final Appeal; accordingly the motion was dismissed and costs were awarded and summarily assessed at HKD 31,010.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal refused; notice of motion withdrawn/cancelled

Orders

  • The defendant's application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal is refused and the notice of motion is withdrawn.
  • The defendant is ordered to pay the plaintiff's costs of this application, summarily assessed at HKD 31,010; the amount will become a permanent order unless varied by summons within 14 days of this judgment.