24 Jul 2020
莊裕安 v. 終審法院司法常務官
- Citation
- [2020] HKCA 587
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Case number
- CACV217/2019
Leave to appeal was refused because (a) issues as to the composition and recusal of CFA judges were the subject of a different appeal (CACV 552/2019) and thus could not form the basis for leave in these proceedings, and (b) the remaining procedural complaint under Rule 7 was not reasonably arguable because the applicant failed to rebut the reasons given by the trial judge; consequently the applicant did not raise a reasonably arguable question of sufficient public importance under s22(1)(b) Cap 484.