Po Yuen (To's) Machine Fty. Ltd. v. Chan Siu King

Read the full judgment text of CACV 209/2002 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 4 September 2002.

1. We have given this application our anxious consideration. We are not satisfied on the basis of the evidence which is before us that the defendant's application for legal aid will necessarily be refused. Over and above this we take cognisance of the fact that Mr Chain for the plaintiff accepts that he cannot on the available evidence demonstrate prejudice to his client if the stay is not lifted. We have decided accordingly to refuse this application and order that an early date be fixed for th

Cites 1 case

Case No.CACV 209/2002
Court
Court of Appeal
Date04 Sep 2002
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

CACV000209/2002

CACV 209/2002

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 209 OF 2002

(ON APPEAL FROM DCCJ 13902 OF 2001)

______________

BETWEEN
PO YUEN (TO'S) MACHINE FTY. LTD. Plaintiff
AND
CHAN SIU KING Defendant

______________

Coram: Hon Mayo VP and Stock JA in Court

Date of Hearing: 4 September 2002

Date of Decision: 4 September 2002

_______________

D E C I S I O N

_______________

Hon Mayo VP (giving the decision of the Court):

1.We have given this application our anxious consideration. We are not satisfied on the basis of the evidence which is before us that the defendant's application for legal aid will necessarily be refused. Over and above this we take cognisance of the fact that Mr Chain for the plaintiff accepts that he cannot on the available evidence demonstrate prejudice to his client if the stay is not lifted. We have decided accordingly to refuse this application and order that an early date be fixed for the hearing of the substantive appeal.

2.Costs reserved.

(Simon Mayo) (Frank Stock)
Vice-President Justice of Appeal

Representation:

Mr Benjamin Chain, instructed by Messrs Norman M.K. Yeung & Co., for the Plaintiff.

Defendant in person.

Other Judgments in This Case

Further hearings and rulings under CACV 209/2002