25 Mar 2003
Majority held leave must be refused: the appeal did not qualify as of right under s22(1)(a) because the question raised had no monetary value and the value of the underlying land could not convert it into a monetary dispute; further, no lis existed on the facts so the case was not appropriate for leave under s22(1)(b).
20 Dec 2002
Leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal refused because the application raises primarily disputed questions of fact and a fundamental change of case being advanced for the first time, which does not constitute great general or public importance nor meet the monetary threshold; potential recourse is via proceedings against former lawyers.
9 Mar 2001
The applicant was not entitled to appeal as of right because she failed to demonstrate that the matter in dispute amounted to $1,000,000 or more; there was no point of law of great general or public importance raised and no other grounds justifying leave, therefore the application for leave to appeal was refused.