Re Ashwani Kumar
Read the full judgment text of CACV 290/2018 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 24 January 2019.
1. By our judgment dated 18 October 2018 (published as [2018] HKCA 692 ), we dismissed the applicant’s appeal from the decision of Deputy High Court Judge Bruno Chan dated 29 June 2018 (published as [2018] HKCFI 1437 ) refusing leave to the applicant to apply for judicial review.
Cited by 1 case · Cites 2 cases
|
CACV 290/2018 [2019] HKCA 106 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF APPEAL CIVIL APPEAL NO 290 OF 2018 (ON APPEAL FROM HCAL 866/2017) ________________________
________________________ Before: Hon Lam VP, McWalters and Poon JJA in Court Date of Judgment: 24 January 2019 ___________________ JUDGMENT ___________________ Hon Lam VP (giving the Judgment of the Court): 1.By our judgment dated 18 October 2018 (published as [2018] HKCA 692), we dismissed the applicant’s appeal from the decision of Deputy High Court Judge Bruno Chan dated 29 June 2018 (published as [2018] HKCFI 1437) refusing leave to the applicant to apply for judicial review. 2.By the notice of motion filed on 24 October 2018, the applicant sought to apply for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal. 3.Notwithstanding an unless order of 26 October 2018 made by the Registrar of Civil Appeals, the applicant did not lodge any submissions. Thus, his notice of motion shall be determined on materials before the court. 4.The applicant did not raise in his notice of motion any question of great general or public importance that is worthy of consideration by the Court of Final Appeal. Nor do we see any reason to grant leave on the “otherwise” limb. The statutory criterion for granting leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal is not met: see section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap 484). 5.For these reasons, we dismiss the notice of motion filed on 24 October 2018.
The applicant acting in person |
Cases cited in this judgment
Other judgments that cite this case
Further hearings and rulings under CACV 290/2018