Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Mandatory orders

Legal area

Court

27 Apr 2011

THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF CHAMPION COURT v. PANG PING FAN PETER AND ANOTHER

Citation

THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF CHAMPION COURT v. PANG PING FAN PETER AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP359/2011

The Court refused leave to appeal because the application had no reasonable prospect of success: the Court of Appeal's judgment (CACV 317/2006) unambiguously required removal of the illegal structures and the 2nd defendant's reinterpretation was untenable and amounted to an abuse of process; enforcement by Judge Lok was proper under the relevant rules and statutes.
10 Oct 2007

DONALD KOO HOI YAN v. KAO LEE & YIP (a firm)

Citation

DONALD KOO HOI YAN v. KAO LEE & YIP (a firm)
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FAMV26/2007

Leave to appeal was granted because the questions identified were reasonably arguable and of great general or public importance, engaging s.22(1)(b) and therefore warranting determination by the Court of Final Appeal.
19 Jun 1975

ATTORNEY GENERAL v. LUI FUK YUEN

Citation

ATTORNEY GENERAL v. LUI FUK YUEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC300/1975

When both equipment and commodity have been seized under s.86(1) and the accused is convicted of a designated hawker offence, s.86A(1) requires the court to order forfeiture of all seized property; the magistrate had no discretion to confiscate only part of the seized items and must order confiscation of both equipment and commodity.