8 May 2024
The Court dismissed the application to extend time because the applicant failed to identify any question of great general or public importance under s22(1)(b) HKCFAO and his grounds did not demonstrate sufficient merit to justify exercising the discretion under s24(5) to extend time; therefore the notice of motion was dismissed.
14 Nov 2022
The Court refused to extend time because the applicant failed to adequately explain the delay and, critically, the intended appeal had no prospect of success as it did not raise any question of great and general public importance and the grounds advanced were not viable; therefore extension would be futile under the court’s discretionary power pursuant to HKCFAO ss24 and 22(1)(b).
28 Sept 2022
The Court refused to extend time and refused leave because the application was about 13 days out of time with no satisfactory explanation for the delay and the intended appeal did not identify any question of great general or public importance under s22(1)(b) HKCFAO and lacked merit.
22 Aug 2019
Refusal to extend time and dismiss the notice of motion because the delay was substantial and unexplained, the applicant failed to show good grounds or identify any question of great general or public importance under s22(1)(b) HKCFAO, and the written submissions lacked specificity and merit.