Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Delay in judgment

Legal area

Court

27 Mar 2023

YCKS v. MPKC

Citation

[2023] HKCA 447
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV113/2021

The Court upheld the trial judge’s adverse inference from the husband’s deficient, piecemeal disclosure and accepted the use of his earlier Form E values plus a revised valuation of the Lamma Property to compute total matrimonial assets; given the wife’s lack of resources and the children’s foreseeable needs and the husband’s non-compliance with MPS orders, the appropriate remedy was to order transfer of the Lamma Property to the wife on nil consideration subject to the Director of Legal Aid's first charge and the wife's undertaking to meet the children’s reasonable needs, to discharge outsta…
20 Sept 2021

YCKS v. MPKC

Citation

[2021] HKCA 1350
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP97/2021

Leave to appeal was granted for specified grounds where delay and identified errors (notably alleged double‑counting of children’s maintenance and unclear aspects of the wife’s maintenance) gave reasonable prospects of success and weakened the trial judge’s advantage; leave was refused for procedural grounds where no timely interlocutory applications were made or no prejudice shown; recusal and bare allegations of bias were rejected; one ground (ESF assistance) was reserved pending provision of transcript.
31 May 2019

朱沛鴻對 THE SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE (SUED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE)

Citation

[2019] HKDC 687
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI641/2016

The application for permission to appeal was refused because the appellant failed to demonstrate a reasonable prospect of success under s63A(2) of the District Court Ordinance or any other compelling reason: the trial judge's credibility and factual findings were not palpably erroneous, the appellant's new factual allegations were not raised at trial, there was no unfair trial or bias, the delay did not amount to prejudice and the damages challenge was unarguable.
1 Apr 2016

NG KWOK TAI ANDREW v. NG OI CHE AND ANOTHER

Citation

NG KWOK TAI ANDREW v. NG OI CHE AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FAMV41/2015

Leave to appeal was refused because Andrew had no arguable substantive appeal—the trial judge's delay did not render the Substantive Judgment unsafe; liability for costs under s.52A(2) did not constitute the requisite substantive legal interest for joinder under O.15 r.6(2)(b)(ii); the costs procedure under O.62 r.6A afforded Andrew a proper opportunity to be heard and there was no denial of natural justice; consequently the conditional leave previously given by the Court of Appeal was academic and further leave was unwarranted.
1 Apr 2016

NG KWOK TAI ANDREW v. NG OI CHE AND ANOTHER

Citation

NG KWOK TAI ANDREW v. NG OI CHE AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FAMV42/2015

Leave to appeal was refused because Andrew had no arguable substantive appeal against the dismissal of the mother's action (so joinder would have no practical consequence), the delay in judgment did not render the Substantive Judgment unsafe, liability under s.52A(2) for costs does not by itself amount to the requisite substantive legal interest for joinder under O.15 r.6(2)(b), and the procedures used (including the two-stage O.62 r.6A process) afforded Andrew a proper opportunity to be heard, so no denial of natural justice was shown.
27 Feb 2015

TO PUI KUI v. NG OI CHE AND OTHERS

Citation

TO PUI KUI v. NG OI CHE AND OTHERS
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV156/2014

Exposure to a costs liability under s.52A(2) does not constitute the substantive legal interest required to permit joinder under Order 15 r.6(2)(b); the judge did not err in exercising discretion to make the s.52A(2) costs order against Andrew and the joinder summons was properly dismissed with costs.
7 Jul 2014

CHOW SAU HEI v. HO KEUNG YUEN AND ANOTHER

Citation

CHOW SAU HEI v. HO KEUNG YUEN AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV114/2013

The trial judge’s extensive factual findings and credibility assessments were not shown to be plainly wrong even applying heightened scrutiny for delayed judgment; the petitioner failed to establish oppressive conduct or proven unauthorised withdrawals that would justify relief under section 168A, and the appeal is dismissed with costs.
7 Jul 2014

CHOW SAU HEI v. HO KEUNG YUEN AND OTHERS

Citation

CHOW SAU HEI v. HO KEUNG YUEN AND OTHERS
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV113/2013

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal: the trial judge's extensive factual findings were supported by the evidence and inherent probabilities and were not plainly wrong despite an unreasonable delay; Chow failed to prove oppressive conduct or breach of duty under s.168A warranting relief; accounting records had been provided and the challenged withdrawals were adequately explained as reimbursements or agreed transactions; the indemnity costs order was upheld.
22 Mar 2013

HUI LING LING v. SKY FIELD DEVELOPMENT LTD

Citation

HUI LING LING v. SKY FIELD DEVELOPMENT LTD
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV122/2012

The recorder's factual findings that the plaintiff failed to discharge the burden of proving the leakage originated from the defendant's flat were supported by independent investigations, credible contrary expert evidence and inherent probabilities; the Court of Appeal found no basis to overturn those findings despite delay and dismissed the appeal.