13 Jan 2026
The applicant’s summons was a mistaken application for habeas corpus which the court found to be beyond the scope of the proceedings before it; accordingly the court made no order on the summons.
3 Nov 2020
The Notice of Motion was dismissed because the delay of over 16 months was excessive, the applicant provided no adequate explanation for the delay, no grounds or arguable merits of an appeal were identified and no question of great general or public importance under s.22(1)(b) was shown; accordingly no extension of time or leave to appeal was granted.
18 Jan 2019
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) Cap 484, and because the merits of the intended appeal are properly considered as part of extension of time applications; the applicant's arguments about lack of assistance were insufficient to alter that outcome.
17 Sept 2018
Application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal was dismissed because the proposed grounds were case‑specific, did not satisfy the statutory threshold of great general or public importance under s22(1)(b) Cap 484, and were not reasonably arguable; there was no basis to grant leave under the 'or otherwise' limb.