YIM SUK HAN v. HKSAR
- Citation
- YIM SUK HAN v. HKSAR
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Hong Kong
- Court
- Court of Final Appeal
- Decision
- 31 May 2007
- Posture
- Miscellaneous Proceedings (criminal) Application for Leave to Appeal From HCMA No. 945 of 2006 / Determination on Application for Leave to Appeal
- Case number
- FAMC8/2007
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- Court of Final Appeal
- Decision
- 31 May 2007
- Posture
- Miscellaneous Proceedings (criminal) Application for Leave to Appeal From HCMA No. 945 of 2006 / Determination on Application for Leave to Appeal
- Case number
- FAMC8/2007
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant failed to show that the case was rare and exceptional or that there was a reasonably arguable departure from accepted norms so serious as to justify a second criminal appeal in the absence of a point of law of great and general importance.
Court disposition
Leave to appeal refused.
Orders
- Leave to appeal refused.
02
Material facts
Parties
YIM SUK HAN
Applicant Counsel: Mr Shahmim K Khattak (instructed by Messrs C K Chan & Co)HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
Respondent Counsel: Ms Mary Sin; Mr Isaac Tam (Department of Justice)03
Procedural history
Posture
Miscellaneous Proceedings (criminal) Application for Leave to Appeal From HCMA No. 945 of 2006 / Determination on Application for Leave to Appeal
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the application meets the high threshold of 'substantial and grave injustice' to justify leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal
- 02
Whether the case discloses a reasonably arguable complaint of a departure from accepted norms sufficient to warrant a second criminal appeal in the absence of a point of law of great and general importance
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Counsel submitted extensive written and oral arguments asserting substantial and grave injustice and alleging departure from accepted norms, seeking leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.
- Respondent
- The respondent (Department of Justice) argued that the case is not rare or exceptional, does not disclose a reasonably arguable departure from accepted norms, and does not raise a point of law of great and general importance to justify leave.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Court of Final Appeal (this determination)
Appeals to the Court of Final Appeal on the ground of substantial and grave injustice are reserved for rare and exceptional cases.
- 02
Court of Final Appeal (this determination)
The primary function of the Court of Final Appeal in criminal matters is to resolve points of law of great and general importance; absent such a controversy, leave will not be granted except in genuinely exceptional circumstances.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant failed to show that the case was rare and exceptional or that there was a reasonably arguable departure from accepted norms so serious as to justify a second criminal appeal in the absence of a point of law of great and general importance.
Obiter and limits
- Counsel for the applicant advanced every possible argument with industry but the statutory and jurisprudential threshold for leave is deliberately high.
- The Court emphasised the limited scope of its intervention in criminal appeals absent significant legal controversy.
Court disposition
Leave to appeal refused.
- Leave to appeal refused.
Source and reliance status
Court of Final Appeal · 31 May 2007
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Court of Final Appeal
Judgment· 31 May 2007
bjbj FAMC No. 8 of 2007
IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 8 OF 2007 (CRIMINAL) (ON APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL FROM HCMA NO. 945 OF 2006) _____ Between:
YIM SUK HAN Applicant - and -
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION Respondent _____ Appeal Committee : Mr Justice Bokhary PJ, Mr Justice Chan PJ and Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ Date of Hearing : 31 May 2007 Date of Determination : 31 May 2007
D E T E R M I N A T I O N Mr Justice Bokhary PJ : Mr Khattak has, with great industry, put forward, in writing and in oral argument, everything that can possible be advanced on the applicant s behalf. His task is a difficult one. Appeals to the Court of Final Appeal on the substantial and grave injustice ground are reserved for rare and exceptional cases so rare and exceptional as to disclose a reasonably arguable complaint of a departure from accepted norms so seriously to the complainant s disadvantage as to justify a second criminal appeal even in the absence of any real controversy on a point of law of great and general importance, the resolution of such controversy being the primary function of the Court of Final Appeal in the administration of criminal justice. In our view, this is not a case of that nature. Accordingly leave to appeal is refused. (Kemal Bokhary) (Patrick Chan) (RAV Ribeiro) Permanent Judge Permanent Judge Permanent Judge Mr Shahmim K Khattak (instructed by Messrs C K Chan & Co) for the applicant Ms Mary Sin and Mr Isaac Tam (of the Department of Justice) for the respondent
PAGE -
PAGE - &`#$ Normal.dot setup Microsoft Word 9.0 Judiciary Hong Kong Title Microsoft Word Document MSWordDoc Word.Document.8
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.