Sia Beng Sin and Another v. Chan May Lin
Read the full judgment text of on BabelCite. was delivered on 5 January 1999.
2. Unfortunately, the applicant has not focused upon these important matters. She is aggrieved by the decision of this Court, the decision of the judge below and the master, but nothing has been demonstrated to us upon which we could possibly exercise our discretion under s.22. In those circumstances the application must be dismissed.
|
CACV000243A/1997 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF APPEAL 1997, No. 243
-------------------------- Coram: Mortimer V-P, Liu and Leong JJA in Court Date of Judgment: 5 January 1999 ---------------------- J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Mortimer, V.-P. (giving the judgment of the Court) : This is the defendant's application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal under s.22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance. In order to succeed, she has to persuade this Court to exercise its discretion in her favour if in our opinion there is a question involved in the appeal which is by reason of its great or general importance ought to be submitted to the Court of Final Appeal for decision, or which ought to be granted for some other reason. 2. Unfortunately, the applicant has not focused upon these important matters. She is aggrieved by the decision of this Court, the decision of the judge below and the master, but nothing has been demonstrated to us upon which we could possibly exercise our discretion under s.22. In those circumstances the application must be dismissed. 3. It only remains for us to point out that the facts of this matter, and earlier proceedings in front of this Court and below, are summarised in Liu JA's judgment of 31 July 1998. 4. This application is refused.
Representation: Defendant/Appellant in person Plaintiffs/Respondents in person |