Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Official solicitor appointment

  • 30 Jun 2023

    WSSA v. SYH

    Citation
    [2023] HKFC 125
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC4633/2020

    Applying the apparent bias test the judge examined each ground (D1–D7) and found the impugned orders and directions were lawful case management decisions based on material evidence (expert reports, social welfare memo, Official Solicitor concerns) rather than indications of bias; vacating the trial and interim orders were justified to protect the children and manage court resources; the recusal summons therefore failed and costs were awarded to the Petitioner.

  • 24 Feb 2017

    DAIMLER AG v. HELGE HERBERT LEIDUCK AND ANOTHER

    Citation
    DAIMLER AG v. HELGE HERBERT LEIDUCK AND ANOTHER
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA4089/1994

    On the available material the court was satisfied the 1st defendant was in need of a next friend due to pervasive cognitive decline evidenced in medical reports and trial testimony; balancing practical realities (location in Germany, need to obtain local medical records and witnesses, existing familiarity of Mr Leiduck Jr with the case) and absence of any other fit and willing person, the court appointed Mr Helge Leiduck Jr as next friend and ordered limited costs against the 1st defendant for the plaintiff's B&M Letter to be assessed summarily.

  • 18 Jan 2000

    CHAN SAI LUN HENRY v. CHAN WAI WAH AND ANOTHER

    Citation
    CHAN SAI LUN HENRY v. CHAN WAI WAH AND ANOTHER
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACV143/1998

    The debarring Order was set aside because it lacked jurisdictional and evidential foundation: the Mental Health Act 1983 no longer applied, the Mental Health Ordinance procedures required for declaring mental incapacity were not followed, Order 80 cannot be used independently of those procedures, and the statutory route for barring litigants (HCO s27) was not invoked; accordingly the debarment and the dependent striking-out Order were unlawful and must be set aside; stay applications were refused on their merits.