李文永 對 博愛醫院
Section 28(3) of the Small Claims Tribunals Ordinance renders the Court of First Instance's refusal to grant leave final, so the appellant had no legal right to pursue the filed originating process; accordingly the originating process dated 17 November 2025 was struck out.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2026] HKCA 332
- Parties
- Appellant: LI WENYONG; Respondent: POK OI HOSPITAL
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Hong Kong
- Judgment Date
- 6 March 2026
- Case Number
- CAMP219/2025
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal From Refusal of Permission to Appeal From Small Claims Tribunal / Permission to Appeal Struck Out
- Outcome
- Originating process filed 17 November 2025 struck out; no order as to costs.
- Legal Topics
- Leave to Appeal, Finality of Decision Under Statute, Small Claims Tribunal Jurisdiction
- Source Language
- ch
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
LI WENYONG
Appellant
POK OI HOSPITAL
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Refusal of Permission to Appeal From Small Claims Tribunal / Permission to Appeal Struck Out
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether section 28(3) of the Small Claims Tribunals Ordinance (Cap.338) bars further appeal after the Court of First Instance refuses permission to appeal
- 2 Whether the appellant's originating process filed on 17 November 2025 could be maintained despite that statutory bar
Ratio Decidendi
Section 28(3) of the Small Claims Tribunals Ordinance renders the Court of First Instance's refusal to grant leave final, so the appellant had no legal right to pursue the filed originating process; accordingly the originating process dated 17 November 2025 was struck out.
Court Disposition
Originating process filed 17 November 2025 struck out; no order as to costs.
Orders
- Originating process filed 17 November 2025 struck out.
- No order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
CAMP 219/2025, [2026] HKCA 332 原案件:[2025] HKCFI 5587 香港特別行政區 高等法院上訴法庭 雜項案件2025年第219號 (擬上訴的原本案件:小額錢債審裁處上訴案件2025年第32號) 申索人(上訴人) 李文永 (LI WENYONG) 及 被告人(答辯人) 博愛醫院 (POK OI HOSPITAL) 主審法官: 高等法院上訴法庭副庭長關淑馨 高等法院上訴法庭法官陳健強 判案書日期: 2026年3月6日 判 案 書 由上訴法庭副庭長關淑馨頒發上訴法庭判案書: 有關本案的背景,在高等法院原訟法庭暫委法官鄺嘉彤2025年11月13日的判決書([2025] HKCFI 5587)已有敘述,在此不贅。簡單而言,申索人就小額錢債審裁處暫委審裁官的裁決,向高等法院原訟法庭提出上訴許可申請,鄺法官拒絕給予上訴許可。 申索人在2025年11月17日,向上訴法庭存檔傳票及誓章。傳票沒有清楚述明所申請的濟助,而是寫著: 「本人於13/11/2025年,於原訟法庭鄺嘉彤暫委法官聆訊下,向鄺官提出新的法律[論]點:根據香港法律上有效的必須的合約六大條件,該被告人已違反了第2及第六條規定,但在收到原訟庭的判決書上完全沒有提交此法律新[論]點。」 此外,申索人在2025年11月18日,存檔一份誓章,提交新的證據。 民事上訴司法常務官在2025年12月2日曾作出指示,表明根據《小額錢債審裁處條例》(第338章)第28(3)條,原訟法庭拒絕批予上訴許可的決定,是最終的決定。故此,申索人的傳票應被撤銷。並指示如申索人反對法庭撤銷該傳票,應呈交書面陳詞。 申索人其後呈交了三頁的書面陳詞,闡述案件的背景,以及他認爲審裁處及原訟法庭的判決有何錯誤及不公平之處。 《小額錢債審裁處條例》第28(3)條,清楚訂明原訟法庭拒絕批予上訴許可的決定是最終的決定。因此,申索人無權再提出上訴及/或上訴許可申請,故此本庭剔除他在2025年11月17日存檔的傳票,不作訟費命令。 (關淑馨) 高等法院上訴法庭副庭長 (陳健強) 高等法院上訴法庭法官 申索人(上訴人):無律師代表,親自行事