17 Sept 2024
The application for leave to appeal out of time was dismissed because the first defendant failed to file any affidavit explaining the delay or any written grounds demonstrating a real prospect of success; given the prior rulings striking out his defence and absence of evidence, the statutory/common law factors for extending time were not satisfied, and costs were awarded to the plaintiff.
1 Nov 2022
Leave to appeal refused because the proposed grounds (evidence, hearsay, revocation) do not show any arguable or reasonably arguable error in the judge's factual findings; the credibility assessments and findings on licence versus adverse possession were sustainable and not plainly wrong; the hearsay issue, even if excluded, would not change the outcome; the revocation argument is unarguable given the pleaded case and timing (one day short of 12 years). Accordingly there are no reasonable prospects of success and no basis for a stay.
3 May 2021
The administrator was entitled to possession and delivery of title deeds because there was no legally binding agreement extinguishing the administrator's rights; the first defendant had no proprietary interest or valid defence and the gratuitous licence was revoked, therefore the court ordered delivery of deeds and vacant possession within a reasonable time (42 days) and awarded costs against the first defendant.
12 Jul 2019
The R Parking Spaces were validly created under the 1973 resolution; the Licence for R18 was a contractual, revocable licence subject to implied terms and the Rules; the defendant unreasonably breached the implied terms and DMC by persistently obstructive parking (not excused by the traffic pillars); proprietary estoppel and acquiescence were not established; selective prosecution is not an independent defence here; accordingly the plaintiff validly revoked the licence from 1 August 2016, is entitled to possession, mesne profits at HK$1,000 per month and a declaration that it must take reason…
13 Nov 2018
The appeal was dismissed because the defendant filed the appeal out of time without reasonable explanation, relied on inadmissible fresh evidence, failed to show the default judgment was irregular or that any defence had a real prospect of success (WhatsApp contemporaneous evidence rebutted alleged agreements and consent), and thus no extension of time or leave to adduce further affidavits was granted; costs awarded to plaintiff and interim stay terminated.
11 Jan 2016
The application for leave is refused because the applicants failed to show their grounds were reasonably arguable with a realistic prospect of success; the Board examined evidence, made permissible factual findings on after-hours sales and breaches which outweighed later good conduct, and provided sufficient reasons such that its decision to revoke the licence fell within the range of acceptable outcomes.
18 Apr 2012
Leave to appeal was refused because the district judge properly exercised case management powers in staying the duplicative proceeding, the defendant as an undischarged bankrupt lacked independent capacity to prosecute the appeal and the trustee would not prosecute, and the proposed appeal had no reasonable prospect of success and did not present exceptional circumstances warranting appellate intervention.
27 Sept 1999
The Court held the 1961 communications did not create proprietary rights or an irrevocable licence enforceable against the Housing Authority; occupation permits issued under the Resettlement Ordinance remained determinable and the notices to quit were valid; no unconscionable conduct or proprietary estoppel arose to entitle the applicants to damages, so the appeals fail (procedural irregularities in joinder noted but did not alter outcome).
27 Sept 1999
The 1961 communications did not confer proprietary rights or an irrevocable licence; residents remained licensees under occupation permits terminable on notice; there was no unconscionable conduct giving rise to proprietary estoppel; the Housing Authority's notices to quit were valid; therefore no entitlement to damages flowed from the letters and the appeals must be dismissed.
27 Sept 1999
The 1961 communications did not create proprietary rights or an irrevocable licence; residents remained licensees under the Resettlement Ordinance and occupation permits terminable on notice; the notices to quit were valid; there was no private law basis for damages in these judicial review proceedings and the consolidated appeals fail.