15 Apr 2026
Extension of time to appeal was refused because the applicant provided inconsistent and inadequate reasons for delay and failed to demonstrate any arguable grounds or reasonable prospect of success in the intended judicial review; absent such prospect, an extension will not be granted.
29 May 2025
The application for leave to appeal out of time was refused because the applicant delayed about two months beyond the statutory deadline without a credible or acceptable explanation (a broken phone did not excuse the delay given available alternatives and evidence of a replacement phone), and the proposed grounds of appeal lacked a real prospect of success (hiring a lawyer is a protected right, evidence indicated rent loss exceeded HK$75,000, and one ground was irrelevant to the costs order).
6 Jun 2024
The defendant's application for permission to appeal was dismissed because it was filed 20 days out of time without any reasonable explanation, the defendant had prior experience of late filings and cannot rely on lack of legal representation, the Notice contained no arguable grounds showing a real prospect of success and included irrelevant and repetitive material amounting to abuse of process; accordingly the court declined to extend time or grant permission and ordered costs against the defendant.
12 Dec 2022
The summons for extension of time was dismissed because the applicant failed to provide any acceptable explanation for the delay, would not engage with the court, and failed to demonstrate a real prospect of success in the intended appeal given the lack of arguable grounds in the underlying NRF/judicial review application.
25 Nov 2022
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 as required by section 22(1)(b) HKCFAO, failed to particularize errors or provide supporting evidence, and the matters raised were fact‑specific and therefore not appropriate for the Court of Final Appeal.
16 Nov 2022
Extension of time to appeal was refused because the applicant offered an unsatisfactory explanation for the delay, failed to support the application with an affidavit, and the underlying judicial review had no real prospect of success; in all the circumstances it was not in the interests of justice to grant an extension.
7 Nov 2022
The Court refused permission to appeal and dismissed the application because the notice of appeal was filed out of time without satisfactory explanation, the proposed appeal had no real prospect of success, and the applicant had not first sought the mandatory permission from the trial court under Order 59 rule 2B for a non‑final decision; accordingly the application was dismissed and the originating summons vacated.
16 Jun 2022
Extension of time was refused because the applicant failed to give adequate reasons for delay, his application lacked any arguable grounds or real prospect of success on appeal, and in all the circumstances it was not in the interests of justice to grant an extension.
2 Jun 2022
The application was dismissed because it was filed well outside the statutory and practice‑direction time limits without a reasonable explanation for the delay, and because the matters advanced were factual/evidential complaints and repeats of grounds already considered by the Court of Appeal rather than any point of law of general public and wide importance warranting a certificate to the Court of Final Appeal.
16 Mar 2022
The summons was an abuse of process and must be struck out because the applicant persistently sought to revisit a consent order that had already been set aside and rejected on appeal, and he failed to disclose any fresh or special grounds to justify reopening the matter.