Ma Bik Yung v. Ko Chuen
Read the full judgment text of DCEO 1/1997 on BabelCite. This DCEO judgment was delivered on 27 June 2000.
1. The application is refused. We do not consider that an arguable case has been made out that the wrong test was applied by the Court of Appeal.
Cited by 1 case
|
CACV000267A/1999 CACV 267/99 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF APPEAL CIVIL APPEAL NO. 267 OF 1999 (ON APPEAL FROM DCEO 1/1997) ______________________________
_____________ Coram: Hon Mayo VP, Keith JA and Ribeiro JA in Court Date of Hearing: 27 June 2000 Date of Decision: 27 June 2000 _____________ D E C I S I O N _____________ Hon Mayo VP (giving the decision of the Court): 1. The application is refused. We do not consider that an arguable case has been made out that the wrong test was applied by the Court of Appeal. 2. The test is sufficiently set out in ss. 6 and 8 of the Disability Discrimination Ordinance, Cap. 487 in relation to discrimination and in s. 38 in relation to harassment. 3. We do not think that it is arguable that the court chose the wrong comparator. 4. So far as the apology is concerned in our judgment we said at p. 15:
5. In our view a hollow apology does not come within s. 72(4)(b). 6. It is also our view that the requirements of s. 22(1)(b) of the Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, Cap. 484 have not been met.
Representation: Mr Christopher Grounds, instructed by the Equal Opportunities Commission, for the plaintiff Mr Wong Yan-lung, instructed by Messrs Alfred Lau & Co. for the defendant |
Other judgments that cite this case