Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Alleged bias

Legal area

Court

22 Jul 2022

KHADIM UMAIR v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Citation

[2022] HKCA 1032
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP186/2021

The Court refused to grant extension of time and leave to appeal because the applicant was substantially late beyond the statutory period, offered an inadequate and unspecific explanation for the delay, failed to show any real prospect of success or any question of great general or public importance under s22(1)(b), and relied on bare assertions without supporting particulars or evidence; accordingly the Court dismissed the Notice of Motion and refused leave to appeal.
17 Aug 2021

RE RAI GITA

Citation

[2021] HKCA 1114
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV142/2020

Leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal is refused because the applicant failed to identify any question of great general or public importance under s22(1)(b) Cap 484 and the new grounds raised were not reasonably arguable; procedural non-compliance with Practice Direction 2.1 justified dealing with the application on the papers and debarment from written submissions.
7 Aug 2019

RE AHMED TOSIF

Citation

[2019] HKCA 787
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP196/2018

Leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal was refused because the earlier decision refusing leave to appeal out of time is final under s14AB, the applicant failed to identify any question of great general or public importance required by s22(1)(b), raised new points and no arguable grounds or particulars supporting danger or bias were presented, and appellate practice precludes granting leave on new fact‑sensitive points not previously argued.
31 May 2019

RE PAKHAR RAM

Citation

[2019] HKCA 589
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP177/2018

Leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal was refused because the questions raised did not involve any issue of great general or public importance, there was no prospect of success in the intended appeal, the statutory criteria under s22(1)(b) Cap.484 were not met, and the applicant failed to file required written submissions so the application was decided on papers.
16 Jul 1997

HKSAR v. ABID GUL @ ABID GULL @ ABID NAVEED BUTT AND ANOTHER

Citation

HKSAR v. ABID GUL @ ABID GULL @ ABID NAVEED BUTT AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC24/1997

Leave to appeal was refused because examination of the trial transcript showed no misdirection, bias or ineffective assistance; the evidence supported convictions for trafficking based on possession of substantial quantities of methamphetamine; and the 8-year sentence fell within established appellate sentencing guidelines.

Hong Kong Case Law

KHADIM UMAIR v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

RE RAI GITA

RE AHMED TOSIF

RE PAKHAR RAM

HKSAR v. ABID GUL @ ABID GULL @ ABID NAVEED BUTT AND ANOTHER