26 Sept 2023
ZL v. WY AND OTHERS
- Citation
- [2023] HKCFI 2447
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCMP948/2020
The Court held that leave to appeal was required for an interlocutory s.21M decision and refused leave because the proposed appeal lacked reasonable prospects of success on the evidence before the court (the Wife's later affidavits were excluded as new evidence failing Ladd v Marshall); consequently no stay was granted beyond a limited 35‑day interim period and the continuation summonses were dismissed with costs ordered against the Wife.