Zhi Charles v. The Stock Exchange of Hong Kong and Another

HCAL 160/2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST

NO 160 OF 2017

____________

____________

___________________

D E C I S I O N

___________________

1.The applicant applies for leave to apply for judicial review and is absent today. 

2.He has applied to withdraw the present leave application.  In fact, the applicant is an undischarged bankrupt, and the Official Receiver does not adopt the present proceedings.  I therefore give leave to withdraw. 

3.The putative respondents, Stock Exchange and Securities and Futures Commission, have applied for costs in the region of $7,000 each. 

4.The principles governing whether costs should be awarded to a putative respondent in an unsuccessful application have been set out in the case of Television Broadcasts Limited v Communications Authority HCAL 3/2013, Au J, on 22 July 2013.  The court would only award costs against an unsuccessful applicant for leave where there are unusual or exceptional circumstances to justify to do so. 

5.The learned judge then set out seven factors in his judgment, they are non-exclusive. 

6.The sole ground for the applicant’s withdrawal in this case is his bankruptcy.  Although the court had asked the putative respondents to file an initial response, the applicant has withdrawn his leave application within four days of the court giving that direction for the respondents to file the initial response. 

7.In the end, no initial response has been filed. The putative respondents have not shown that the applicant fell within any of the factors set out in the judgment of Au J.  In the premises, I make no order as to costs.

The applicant was not represented and did not appear

Attendance of the Official Receiver was excused