Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Delay and extensions

Legal area

Court

26 Sept 2025

SOUARE AMINATA BELLO AND ANOTHER v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4231
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1258/2020

Leave was granted because the Board erred in law by failing to consider the child's claim and child-specific vulnerability and by not addressing whether the minor had legal representation; the mother's and child's claims are closely connected and should be considered together. The court exercised discretion to grant leave despite delay because the application has merits.
25 Mar 2024

李對蘇

Citation

[2024] HKFC 57
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC9180/2022

Leave to appeal out of time was refused because the respondent delayed about eight months without adequate explanation, had no realistic prospect of success on appeal, service of the proceedings was properly effected and the respondent's asserted reasons (new immigrant, ignorance of law, inability to pay, history of abuse) did not justify granting the extension; therefore the summons for leave dated 21 November 2023 was dismissed and the earlier costs order stands.
29 Aug 2019

財通國際證券有限公司 v. 楊國紅

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 2149
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1757/2016

The appeal is dismissed and the Master's conditional order upheld because the court has the residual discretion to impose conditions when setting aside a default judgment obtained by irregular service, and on the facts there was strong evidence the Defendant evaded service, had or turned a blind eye to notice, displayed inordinate delay in seeking relief and showed no real defence, so requiring payment of HK$15,257,569.48 into court as security was appropriate to protect the Plaintiff.
27 Mar 2003

CREATILES BUILDING MATERIALS CO LTD v. TO\'S UNIVERSE CONSTRUCTION CO LTD

Citation

CREATILES BUILDING MATERIALS CO LTD v. TO\'S UNIVERSE CONSTRUCTION CO LTD
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV384/2002

The defendant's clear, unequivocal refusal to pay the contractual interim payment, after promises and a set deadline, evinced an intention not to be bound and amounted to repudiation; the contract required interim payments every 14 days without an implied requirement of interim measurement or completion of all coats on one elevation, entitling the plaintiff to terminate and recover loss of profit.

Hong Kong Case Law

SOUARE AMINATA BELLO AND ANOTHER v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

李 對 蘇

財通國際證券有限公司 v. 楊國紅

CREATILES BUILDING MATERIALS CO LTD v. TO\'S UNIVERSE CONSTRUCTION CO LTD

李對蘇