18 Jul 2014
Leave to appeal was refused because the trial judge's adverse credibility and factual findings were supported by compelling and carefully analysed evidence such that there was no proper basis to interfere on appeal and the defendant did not satisfy the statutory threshold in s63A(2) of the District Court Ordinance.
16 Oct 2012
The defendant failed to demonstrate any error in the trial judge's factual finding that the deceased was the beneficial owner of Property A (funds were his), therefore there was no reasonable prospect of success on appeal and leave to appeal was refused; the Court also exercised its rule 2A(8) power to bar further re-application under r.2A(7).
20 Jul 2012
The Court held the petitioner's claims were unliquidated monetary remedies incidental to proprietary rights and thus did not fall within the s22(1)(a) second limb for an appeal as of right; the questions raised were not of great general or public importance and did not meet the high threshold for exceptional leave under the 'or otherwise' limb; accordingly leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal was refused and costs were ordered against the petitioner; the Court of Appeal's reversal of certain trial findings was justified on the reasons given.
16 Sept 2005
Given unchallenged trial findings that the employer condoned and effectively instructed workers to make on-the-spot adjustments without stopping the motor and pressured workers to keep work moving, the unsafe system of work was the cause of the accident; under those facts contributory negligence was not established and defendants were 100% liable; appellate court will not overturn such factual findings absent error.
24 Mar 2005
Leave to appeal was refused because the trial judge's factual findings were supported by the evidence, there was no showing the debts were improperly incurred, no evidential basis was put before the judge that financial restructuring would succeed, and the Court of Appeal will not receive new evidence; accordingly there was no basis to disturb the judge's exercise of discretion under section 11.
5 Jul 2002
Refusal of leave was compelled because there was no arguable ground: the Tribunal's uncontested factual finding that Company One Limited's payment matched the invoice for its own order, combined with the proper construction of the settlement agreement which did not require Company One to pay the Defendant's debt first, meant any appeal would fail.
17 Jan 2001
Because the applicant failed to give a satisfactory explanation for the delay of over four months, the matters raised were challenges to the trial judge's findings of fact and the prospects of success were virtually non-existent, the application to proceed with the intended appeal was dismissed; costs were ordered to the defendant to be taxed under the Legal Aid Regulations.
15 Dec 2000
The application to strike out the notices of appeal was refused; the court held that lack of pleaded arguable points or allegations of abuse are not proper grounds for striking out at this stage and reiterated the strict standard an appellant must meet to reverse primary findings of fact, while directing the appellant to file a supplemental notice within four weeks.
16 Mar 2000
The appeal was dismissed because the Court of Appeal found no acceptable basis to overturn the trial judge's factual and credibility findings: there was evidence to support the judge's conclusions and the appellant bore the heavy burden of showing no reasonable basis for those findings.
10 Dec 1999
The settlement agreement as found by the Adjudicator was a factual finding that could not be displaced on appeal; the settlement agreement was not conditional and the cheque payment which cleared satisfied the balance, therefore the Small Claims Tribunal's awards that disregarded the agreed set-off were quashed and the appeals allowed to that extent.