14 Aug 2024
The application for extension of time to appeal is refused because the applicant's original withdrawal was valid and final, the new grounds are unsupported and self-serving, and the applicant has remedy by making a fresh claim to the Director; therefore no good cause to reopen or extend time.
24 Nov 2021
Refusal to extend time and dismissal of leave application was proper because the applicant's delay of over two years was inordinate and unexplained, the intended challenge lacked arguable merit (no identifiable legal error or procedural unfairness in the Director's or Board's decisions), and the Board validly dismissed the appeal following the applicant's informed withdrawal rendering the appeal non-extant; judicial review is not a vehicle to re-hear the factual risk assessment of the primary decision-makers.
17 Mar 2017
Once the Board validly accepted the applicant's withdrawal, the appeal was disposed of and the Board became functus officio; therefore there was no power under section 16 of Schedule 1A or by implication to reinstate or re-open a validly withdrawn/abandoned appeal and the applicant's remedy is to bring a subsequent claim under section 38ZO.
20 Jun 2016
The court held Tung was entitled to costs of the abandoned Interrogatories Appeal and Wei should pay those costs to Tung to be taxed forthwith if not agreed; Million Decade must pay Tung the costs of the WS Amended Appeal to be taxed forthwith if not agreed; there should be no order as to costs in respect of the FBP Appeal or the FBP Summons; apportionment percentages for counsel brief fees and solicitors' attendance at the Appeal Hearing were fixed to assist taxation, and summary assessment was inappropriate for the full range of items so taxation was ordered for the principal items.
6 Feb 1990
The 18 month sentences imposed on the appellant were manifestly excessive in the specific circumstances (friendship link, one-off transaction, absence of organised syndicate, clear record); the appropriate sentence is 12 months on each charge to run concurrently; the purported abandonment of the appeal was set aside as not being a deliberate informed act and treated as a nullity.