RE THOMAS LAI

RE THOMAS LAI

Extension of time refused and leave dismissed: applicant failed to show good reason for delay or due diligence in pursuing legal aid; even assuming a legitimate expectation existed the decision was lawfully made after taking representations into account, was justified by changed circumstances and public interest in...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
RE THOMAS LAI
Parties
Applicant: Thomas Lai; Putative Respondent: Chief Executive in Council
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
28 February 2014
Case Number
HCAL150/2013
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (extension of Time) / Hearing on Extension of Time for Out of Time Leave Application
Outcome
Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed; extension of time not granted.
Legal Topics
Legitimate Expectation, Extension of Time, Judicial Review, Country Park Designation, Small House Policy
Source Language
en
Administrative Law Public Law Land Use Planning Environmental/conservation Law Legitimate Expectation Extension of Time Judicial Review Country Park Designation +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thomas Lai

Applicant

Chief Executive in Council

Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (extension of Time) / Hearing on Extension of Time for Out of Time Leave Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether applicant had a substantive legitimate expectation that Sai Wan would remain an enclave
  2. 2 Whether applicant justified extension of time under RHC O 53 r 4(1)
  3. 3 Whether the decision to incorporate the enclave was unlawful or an abuse of power

Ratio Decidendi

Extension of time refused and leave dismissed: applicant failed to show good reason for delay or due diligence in pursuing legal aid; even assuming a legitimate expectation existed the decision was lawfully made after taking representations into account, was justified by changed circumstances and public interest in conservation, and incorporation did not automatically extinguish small house rights; judicial review would likely fail.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed; extension of time not granted.

Orders

  • Application for leave dismissed
  • No extension of time granted