12 Feb 2026
The application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal was dismissed because the applicant failed to identify any question of great general or public importance under s22(1)(b) HKCFAO and proffered only vague, unsupported, fact‑specific assertions that amounted to a re‑run of arguments previously rejected, providing no basis for leave under either limb of s22(1)(b).
2 Aug 2024
Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant failed to identify any legal issue of great and general or public importance under s.22(1)(b) and the proposed grounds were merely repetitive factual complaints without arguable legal error; accordingly the application had no real prospect of success and was dismissed, with costs to the respondents to be summarily assessed.
19 Jul 2024
Leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal out of time was refused because the applicant failed to provide any explanation for the delay and failed to identify any question of great general or public importance under s22(1)(b) HKCFAO or any basis under the 'or otherwise' limb; accordingly there was no basis to extend time or grant leave.
20 Oct 2023
The applicant failed to identify any question of great general or public importance and did not advance viable grounds for the intended appeal; therefore the statutory criteria in section 22(1)(b) were not satisfied and leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal must be refused.
3 Aug 2023
The statutory criteria for leave under section 22(1)(b) were not met because the intended appeal does not involve any question of great general or public importance and the proposed grounds are unarguable; accordingly leave to appeal is refused.
16 Sept 2019
The delay in seeking leave to appeal was substantial and inexcusable because the applicant had personally collected and acknowledged the 19 March 2018 judgment and there was no 5 July 2017 order; in addition the application did not raise questions of great general or public importance under s22(1)(b) Cap 484; therefore the court refused to extend time under s24(5) Cap 484 and dismissed the application for leave to appeal.
29 Mar 2019
The application for leave to appeal was dismissed because the applicant's submissions, grounded in personal fear of refoulement, did not raise any question of great general or public importance and no other reason existed to grant leave under s22(1)(b) of the Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap 484).
24 Jan 2019
Leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal was refused because the applicant did not identify any question of great general or public importance and did not satisfy section 22(1)(b) of the Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap 484); the applicant's failure to lodge submissions and to comply with procedural directions warranted determination on the materials before the court and dismissal of the notice of motion.
23 Aug 2018
申請人未能就《香港終審法院條例》第22(1)(b)條的標準提出任何顯示案件涉及重大、廣泛或關乎公眾的重要性或其他足以交由終審法院裁決的理由，故上訴許可不得給予；並因申請被駁回而命令申請人向被告人支付港幣3,200元訟費。
16 Feb 2017
Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant failed to identify any question of great general or public importance as required by s22(1)(b); the matters raised were personal grievances not germane to the dismissal of the appeal and late-filed documents were improperly filed and would not assist the application.