Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Factual findings review

Legal area

Court

17 Jul 2025

DHALIWAL PARAMJIT SINGH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 2983
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL839/2020

Leave to apply for judicial review dismissed because the TCAB's decision was not shown to contain any error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality and the applicant's proposed grounds were not reasonably arguable; the Court will not substitute its factual assessment for TCAB absent such legal defects.
14 May 2019

L 對 Y

Citation

[2019] HKFC 123
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC195/2014

The applicant failed to demonstrate any reasonable prospect of success or any other reason in the interests of justice to justify an appeal under s63A Cap.336; the challenges were repetitions of trial arguments and did not show error in the trial judge's factual findings, therefore leave to appeal was refused.
13 Feb 2019

甘對伍

Citation

[2019] HKFC 36
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC15510/2015

The applicant failed to show any arguable or reasonably likely error in the trial judge's factual or legal determinations; the judge had considered and explained the contested points; contributions were found to be approximately equal; consequently there was no reasonable prospect of success and no other reason to grant leave, so the application for leave to appeal was refused.
9 Oct 2013

劉儀對寶石樓業主立案法團及另一人

Citation

劉儀對寶石樓業主立案法團及另一人
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1835/2013

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed because the applicant failed to demonstrate a real prospect of success; the impugned decisions were findings of fact by the trial judge that were not shown to be plainly wrong, and the second defendant was not personally liable as he acted only as the owners' corporation's representative.
17 Jun 2010

TAIGO LTD v. CHINA MASTER SHIPPING LTD

Citation

TAIGO LTD v. CHINA MASTER SHIPPING LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT22/2010

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant had consented to a documents-only arbitration and its challenge amounted to an impermissible attack on factual findings that the arbitrators were entitled to reach; the arbitrators' reasons were open and not obviously wrong or bizarre; costs awarded on an indemnity basis.
21 Oct 2005

PEARL B. CHENG v. BANK OF AMERICA (ASIA) LTD

Citation

PEARL B. CHENG v. BANK OF AMERICA (ASIA) LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCSA93/2005

Leave to appeal was refused because the court found no error of law in the Adjudicator's decision and the factual findings were not so unreasonable as to amount to a point of law.

Hong Kong Case Law

DHALIWAL PARAMJIT SINGH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

L 對 Y

甘 對 伍

劉儀 對 寶石樓業主立案法團及另一人

TAIGO LTD v. CHINA MASTER SHIPPING LTD

PEARL B. CHENG v. BANK OF AMERICA (ASIA) LTD

甘對伍

劉儀對寶石樓業主立案法團及另一人