Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Leave to appeal threshold

Legal area

Court

6 Feb 2025

RADIO TELEVISION HONG KONG PROGRAMME STAFF UNION AND ANOTHER v. COMMUNICATIONS AUTHORITY

Citation

[2025] HKCA 121
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV584/2021

The Authority failed to establish questions of great general or public importance required for leave to the Court of Final Appeal: the contested issues were academic or fact‑sensitive in the present case, the Authority had not applied the correct approach in the underlying decision, and accordingly both applications for leave are dismissed; costs follow the event (Authority to pay HK$180,000).
13 Mar 2024

ALPHA & LEADER ASSOCIATES LTD v. VICTORY MEGA TRADING LTD

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 788
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA212/2021

The application for leave to appeal was refused because none of the proposed grounds had a reasonable prospect of success or other sufficient reason; the return day hearing was correctly treated as inter partes for the mareva injunction so no duty of full and frank disclosure arose and the court properly evaluated the opportunity to present evidence; the plaintiff had demonstrated a good arguable case and the balance of convenience favoured continuation of the interim mareva injunction; the new evidence lacked utility and was rightly excluded; and the costs orders nisi were properly made and…
6 Mar 2024

WU KEXUAN v. JIANG JINZHI

Citation

[2024] HKCA 215
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP279/2023

Leave to appeal was refused because the Judge had lawfully and reasonably exercised his discretion after considering relevant factors (nature of the tort claim falling outside the separation agreement, defendant's prior participation in court proceedings, and procedural history); there was no clear error of law or fact nor an arguable prospect of success such that an appeal should be permitted.
17 Sept 2021

KWOK HONG YEE JESSE t/a JESSE H.Y. KWOK & CO. v. TSO HON LEUNG AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2021] HKCA 1391
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP154/2020

The Court refused leave to appeal because the defendants failed to show a reasonable prospect of success: the court has jurisdiction to permit alteration or a further bill in appropriate circumstances, Master rulings did not produce an estoppel because the factual ground (non‑payment of counsel) ceased to operate once fees were paid, the claim is not an abuse of process, and the defendants did not establish that the default judgment should be set aside; costs were ordered against the defendants.
7 Mar 2019

WONG WAI LAN v. LI YIM FONG

Citation

[2019] HKDC 295
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3413/2016

The judge correctly exercised fact‑finding and law by assessing enrichment on the overall circumstances, rejected the plaintiffs' submissions that enrichment was established at the date of receipt, held the change of position defence was properly pleaded and causally linked, and concluded the plaintiffs failed to show a reasonable prospect of success for an appeal; accordingly leave to appeal was denied and costs awarded.
7 Mar 2019

CHENG YUEN CHUN v. LI YIM FONG

Citation

[2019] HKDC 295
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3415/2016

The applications for leave to appeal were dismissed because the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a reasonable prospect of success; the judge's factual findings and legal conclusions on enrichment and change of position were sustainable on the evidence and law.
18 Jan 2019

T 對司法機構

Citation

[2019] HKCA 79
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP127/2018

The claim was rightly struck out because it in substance targets judicial acts protected by judicial immunity, discloses no reasonable cause of action and is frivolous/abusive; the asserted employer‑employee route under s48(1) DDO and reliance on O'Brien do not negate judicial immunity; consequently there is no real prospect of success and permission to appeal is refused under s63A(2) Cap.336.
30 Nov 2018

TSANG WOON MING v. TSAN HING TAT HEIDI AND OTHERS

Citation

[2018] HKDC 1498
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3791/2016

None of the proposed grounds for appeal had a reasonable prospect of success; the contested legal issues are fact-sensitive and inappropriate for interlocutory resolution; the plaintiff has pleaded an arguable case on knowledge and remedies which must be resolved at trial; accordingly leave to appeal is refused and costs awarded to the plaintiff.
25 Jul 2014

FORDTIME INDUSTRIAL LTD v. YIP SHING LAM t/a TRADITIONAL CHINESE NOODLE

Citation

FORDTIME INDUSTRIAL LTD v. YIP SHING LAM t/a TRADITIONAL CHINESE NOODLE
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1373/2014

The Court refused leave to appeal because the proposed grounds had no reasonable prospect of success under s11AA(6); on the merits the tenancy was properly construed in its factual matrix as relating to the airspace of Cockloft C without a floor slab with an express obligation to reinstate on termination, and an order for delivery up of vacant possession of that airspace was valid and enforceable; costs were assessed and reduced to HKD 35,000.
21 Mar 2014

HONG KONG TELECOMMUNICATIONS (HKT) LTD v. THE COMMUNICATIONS AUTHORITY

Citation

HONG KONG TELECOMMUNICATIONS (HKT) LTD v. THE COMMUNICATIONS AUTHORITY
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV190/2013

Leave to appeal was refused because the questions relied upon were fact‑sensitive and not of great general or public importance, the OFCA decision point was not properly raised below and lacked notice such that it was inappropriate to elevate it to the Court of Final Appeal, the 'truly engaged' test remains the correct test for jurisdictional issues involving negative decisions and its application depends on factual analysis of the correspondence and background, and no exceptional circumstances justified leave on the 'or otherwise' ground; costs awarded to the appellant.