YUEN OI YEE LISA v. DIRECTOR OF LEGAL AID

YUEN OI YEE LISA v. DIRECTOR OF LEGAL AID

The applicant failed to demonstrate any reasonably arguable ground of legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Director's decision; the Director's conclusion that the PCPD's finding of a DPP5 contravention did not establish a sufficiently connected or arguable s66 claim by the applicant was rational and lawful; accordingly leave to apply for judicial review was refused.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 2031
Parties
Applicant: Yuen Oi Yee Lisa; Putative Respondent: Director of Legal Aid
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
9 July 2021
Case Number
HCAL418/2020
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review of Legal Aid Decision / Leave Application Heard and Dismissed
Outcome
Application for leave dismissed
Legal Topics
Personal Data (privacy) Ordinance S66, Data Protection Principle 5 (dpp5), Legal Aid Refusal, Restrictive Proceedings Order, Judicial Review Leave Threshold
Source Language
EN
Constitutional and Administrative Law Data Protection Law Civil Procedure Employment Law Personal Data (privacy) Ordinance S66 Data Protection Principle 5 (dpp5) Legal Aid Refusal Restrictive Proceedings Order +1 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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yuen Oi Yee Lisa

Applicant

Director of Legal Aid

Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review of Legal Aid Decision / Leave Application Heard and Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Director of Legal Aid lawfully, rationally and fairly refused legal aid to pursue a s66 PDPO claim
  2. 2 Whether the applicant demonstrated reasonable or arguable grounds to bring the underlying s66 claim for injury to feelings against Best Spirits
  3. 3 Whether the DPP5 contravention identified by the PCPD gives rise to an actionable claim by the applicant and is sufficiently connected to her

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to demonstrate any reasonably arguable ground of legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Director's decision; the Director's conclusion that the PCPD's finding of a DPP5 contravention did not establish a sufficiently connected or arguable s66 claim by the applicant was rational and lawful; accordingly leave to apply for judicial review was refused.

Court Disposition

Application for leave dismissed

Orders

  • Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed
  • No order as to costs