Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Hong Kong decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The court dismissed a judicial review challenge to disciplinary proceedings, holding there was no apparent bias, no procedural unfairness from disclosure, and no irrationality.
The District Court granted possessory title by adverse possession over the Lots, rejected illegality and public policy defences, and dismissed the counterclaim.
The Court of First Instance allowed an appeal against refusal to renew a contractor’s registration, holding that the Building Authority gave inadequate reasons and unlawfully applied an unpublished policy.
The application for a certificate was refused because the applicant failed to file written submissions as directed and had ample opportunity to do so; the points raised are factual or unarguable legal contentions and do not satisfy the dual requirement under s32(2) of the Court of Final Appeal Ordinance to show a legal point of great and wide importance or substantial and grave unfairness, therefore no certificate could be issued.
Source excerpt
成本判決中，法院維持原有的 costs order nisi，駁回原告及首至第三被告的變更申請，並命各方不作訟費命令。
On a full re‑examination of the evidence the court concluded the trial judge correctly rejected the appellants' oral testimony as not credible or reasonably capable of constituting a reasonable excuse; documentary and inspection evidence proved prolonged non‑compliance with properly served s24 orders; therefore the prosecution proved the offences beyond reasonable doubt and the convictions must be upheld.
Source excerpt
Costs decision in an adverse possession dispute: the plaintiff was ordered to pay the costs of an interlocutory injunction summons after complying with a Building Department order only after the application.
Court of Appeal refused leave to appeal in two renewed applications over drainage-order compliance, finding no arguable error of law and awarding costs.
Objective evidence and credible witness testimony established that unauthorized works existed and justified the Building Authority's orders; the orders were not ultra vires, malicious, unreasonable or based on mistaken facts; the appellant had no reasonable excuse for non‑compliance; the fresh evidence was irrelevant or unexplained and was not admitted; accordingly convictions are safe and appeal is dismissed.
Source excerpt
Tenancy dispute over a security deposit and window damage ended with judgment for the landlord after the court found the tenant breached repair covenants.
Explore more
