11 May 2026
The Notice of Motion for leave was dismissed because the applicant failed to engage with or identify any error in the Court of Appeal's prior judgment and failed to demonstrate any question of great general or public importance under section 22(1)(b) Cap 484, rendering the application without merit.
9 Apr 2026
Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant did not identify any question of great general or public importance under s22(1)(b) Cap 484, failed to plead particularised or reasonably arguable errors, and offered no basis under the "otherwise" limb; therefore the Notice of Motion is dismissed.
3 Mar 2026
Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant failed to identify any question of great general or public importance as required by section 22(1)(b) Cap 484, raised no reasonably arguable ground in her Notice of Motion and provided no particulars, and no basis was shown to grant leave under the 'otherwise' limb; accordingly the Notice of Motion is dismissed.
13 Oct 2025
Because the Applicant failed to identify any question of great general or public importance, failed to specify any error in the Court of Appeal judgment, and advanced only general allegations without particulars, the intended appeal had no reasonable prospect of success and leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal under s 22(1)(b) was refused.
29 Sept 2025
The Notice of Motion was dismissed because it was filed grossly out of time without any explanation for the serious delay and, on the merits, the applicant failed to identify any question of great general or public importance or any reasonably arguable ground to justify leave under section 22(1)(b) Cap 484 and no basis existed under the "otherwise" limb.
1 Aug 2025
Dismissal of the Notice of Motion was warranted because the applicant failed to comply with the Practice Direction, failed to lodge written submissions or particulars, and failed to identify any error in the Court of Appeal judgment or any question of great general or public importance under s22(1)(b), leaving no basis to grant leave to appeal.
31 May 2023
Leave to appeal was refused because the Notice of Motion failed to identify any question of great general or public importance as required by s22(1)(b), the intended appeal had no merits and no reasonable prospect of success, and the applicants failed to comply with procedural directions, thereby justifying refusal of leave.
2 May 2023
The Notice of Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal was dismissed because the application was barred by the existing RPO in that the applicant had not obtained leave from the Court of First Instance; alternatively, on the merits the applicant failed to provide evidential support, failed to show error in the prior decisions, and failed to identify any question of great general or public importance under section 22(1)(b) Cap 484 or any other basis to grant leave.
28 Mar 2023
The application for leave to appeal was dismissed because the applicant failed to provide a reasonable explanation for the delay and, more critically, failed to identify any question of great general or public importance or any reasonably arguable ground for the Court of Final Appeal under section 22(1)(b) Cap 484; therefore leave could not be granted and there was no basis to exercise the ‘otherwise’ limb.
30 Dec 2022
The Notice of Motion for leave to appeal was dismissed because the applicant failed to provide a reasonable explanation for the delay, failed to identify any question of great general or public importance under s22(1)(b) Cap 484, and the complaints about lack of legal and language assistance did not render the proposed appeal reasonably arguable or meet the "otherwise" limb of s22(1)(b).