Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Right of access to court

Legal area

Court

15 Aug 2019

PA v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIRGRATION

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 2019
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1668/2018

Applicant was given reasonable notice of imminent removal (informed from 25 April 2018 and had several weeks and practical opportunities to commence proceedings); the Director's policy as set out in the LegCo Paper is lawful; removal on 18 May 2018 did not infringe the applicant's right of access to the court; accordingly leave to apply for judicial review in respect of the removal was dismissed.
13 Nov 2012

HO CHUN YAN, ALBERT v. LEUNG CHUN YING AND ANOTHER

Citation

HO CHUN YAN, ALBERT v. LEUNG CHUN YING AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FAMV33/2012

The Court held that it has jurisdiction under section 22(1)(c) of the Court of Final Appeal Ordinance to hear leap-frog appeals in proceedings under the Chief Executive Election Ordinance; Lam JA was correct to strike out the first statement as outside the scope of ECICO s26 and correctly rejected the continuation argument as not reasonably arguable; it was lawful and appropriate to read in a discretion to extend time rather than to strike down the seven-day limit, and applying a 'real prospect of success' threshold for granting extensions was justified given the statutory policy of rapid res…
22 Feb 2011

LEE YEE SHING JACKY AND ANOTHER v. BOARD OF REVIEW (INLAND REVENUE ORDINANCE) AND ANOTHER

Citation

LEE YEE SHING JACKY AND ANOTHER v. BOARD OF REVIEW (INLAND REVENUE ORDINANCE) AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL40/2008

The Board of Review performs an administrative function and does not exercise the judicial power of the HKSAR; the combination of the case stated appeal mechanism and the supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court by way of judicial review provides adequate access to courts under Article 35; the case stated procedure is not unconstitutional and the applicants' prior appeals were valid and binding, so the judicial review application must be dismissed.
26 Feb 1997

ST. CHARE CORPORATION CO. LTD. v. XIPHO DEVELOPMENT CO. LTD.

Citation

ST. CHARE CORPORATION CO. LTD. v. XIPHO DEVELOPMENT CO. LTD.
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV238/1996

Because the landlord had an undoubted right to pursue the second action for rent and possession, commencing that action was not an abuse of the court's process; the judge was correct to set aside the Master's stay and the appeal was dismissed with costs.

Hong Kong Case Law

PA v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIRGRATION

HO CHUN YAN, ALBERT v. LEUNG CHUN YING AND ANOTHER

LEE YEE SHING JACKY AND ANOTHER v. BOARD OF REVIEW (INLAND REVENUE ORDINANCE) AND ANOTHER

ST. CHARE CORPORATION CO. LTD. v. XIPHO DEVELOPMENT CO. LTD.