LI KIN WAH v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

LI KIN WAH v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

Although the applicants had prima facie arguable challenges based on the Court of Final Appeal decision in Lam Siu Po, the applications for leave out of time were refused because the public policy of finality, the excessive length of delay, the limited weight to be given to merits in extension applications, and the substantial prejudice and detriment to good administration (including floodgate and practical rehearing difficulties) together did not constitute good reason to extend time.

Citation
LI KIN WAH v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
Parties
Applicant: Mr Li; Applicant: Mr Yung; Putative Respondent: Commissioner of Police
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
7 May 2010
Case Number
HCAL126/2009
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Out of Time / Application for Extension of Time to Bring Judicial Review Proceedings
Outcome
Applications refused; leave to apply for judicial review out of time denied in both HCAL 126/2009 and HCAL 6/2010
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Finality, Right to Legal Representation, Procedural Fairness, Interpretation of Police General Order Chapter 6 01(8), Prejudice to Good Administration
Source Language
EN
Administrative Law Judicial Review Police Disciplinary Law Constitutional Law Extension of Time Finality Right to Legal Representation Procedural Fairness +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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Li

Applicant

Mr Yung

Applicant

Commissioner of Police

Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Out of Time / Application for Extension of Time to Bring Judicial Review Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was good reason to extend time for leave to apply for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether a change in the understanding of the law (Lam Siu Po) alone justifies extension of time
  3. 3 Weight to be given to the merits of the proposed challenge when deciding extension of time

Ratio Decidendi

Although the applicants had prima facie arguable challenges based on the Court of Final Appeal decision in Lam Siu Po, the applications for leave out of time were refused because the public policy of finality, the excessive length of delay, the limited weight to be given to merits in extension applications, and the substantial prejudice and detriment to good administration (including floodgate and practical rehearing difficulties) together did not constitute good reason to extend time.

Court Disposition

Applications refused; leave to apply for judicial review out of time denied in both HCAL 126/2009 and HCAL 6/2010

Orders

  • Applications for leave to apply for judicial review out of time are refused
  • No order as to costs