Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Standard for granting leave

Legal area

Court

31 Jan 2024

SHERPA NIMA v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Citation

[2024] HKCA 125
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP523/2022

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant failed to identify any error in the Court of Appeal judgment or any question of great general or public importance under section 22(1)(b), and provided only unsupported assertions; failure to comply with Registrar directions justified determination on paper and contributed to refusal of leave.
24 Apr 2023

HEMBA WADUGE NISHANTHA JANAKA KALYANARATHNA v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD

Citation

[2023] HKCA 480
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV446/2022

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant failed to identify any question of great general or public importance under s 22(1)(b), the proposed appeal lacked merits and a reasonable prospect of success, and there was no basis to grant leave under the 'otherwise' limb.
6 Apr 2023

RE SINGH SANTOKH AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2023] HKCA 484
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV448/2021

The Notice of Motion for leave to appeal was dismissed because the applicants failed to identify any question of great general or public importance as required by section 22(1)(b) HKCFAO and no basis was shown under the 'or otherwise' limb; the intended appeal has no merit.
15 Oct 2021

RE FLORES MARITES EVANGELISTA

Citation

[2021] HKCA 1476
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV157/2020

The application for leave was dismissed because the applicant failed to identify any question of great general or public importance under s22(1)(b) CFAO, raised no reasonably arguable ground of appeal nor any basis under the 'otherwise' limb, and therefore leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal was not warranted.
24 Sept 2021

RE MOHAMMED TAJ

Citation

[2021] HKCA 1337
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV337/2020

Leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal was refused because the applicant failed to identify any question of great general or public importance, advanced only broad unparticularised grounds which were not reasonably arguable, and provided no basis under the "otherwise" limb of s22(1)(b).
3 Mar 2021

RE ADNAN HAIDER

Citation

[2021] HKCA 241
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV35/2020

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant failed to identify any question of great general or public importance within s22(1)(b) HKCFAO and there was no basis under the 'or otherwise' limb to grant leave.
31 Dec 2019

羅慧萍對陳德仁律師行之陳德仁律師

Citation

[2020] HKDC 30
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ789/2017

Under s63A(2) DCO the application for leave to appeal was refused because the judge accepted the evidence that the 12 interim bills were mailed and received, the bills showed the plaintiff's deposit was exhausted and she was liable for the charges, and the proposed appeal had no reasonable prospect of success nor any public interest ground warranting a hearing.
26 Jun 2019

RE VERMA SUNNY

Citation

[2019] HKCA 692
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV605/2018

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed because the applicant failed to identify any question of great general or public importance under s22(1)(b), failed to point to any error in the Court of Appeal's judgment, and raised no reasonably arguable issue or basis under the 'otherwise' limb, so leave is not warranted.
1 Jun 2007

ESQUIRE (ELECTRONICS) LTD v. THE HONG KONG AND SHANGHAI BANKING CORPORATION LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

ESQUIRE (ELECTRONICS) LTD v. THE HONG KONG AND SHANGHAI BANKING CORPORATION LTD AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FAMV19/2007

Leave to appeal under s.22(1)(b) was refused because, on the material and submissions, there was no reasonable prospect that the Court of Appeal's judgment would be reversed; accordingly exceptional leave was not justified.