Re Ehsan Qadir
Read the full judgment text of CACV 518/2019 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 30 July 2020.
1. On 23 June 2020, the Applicant filed a Notice of Motion to apply for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal against this Court’s (Lam VP and Barma JA) judgment of 11 June 2020.
Cited by 1 case · Cites 1 case
|
CACV 518/2019 [2020] HKCA 601 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF APPEAL CIVIL APPEAL NO 518 OF 2019 (ON APPEAL FROM HCAL 323/2017 & 508/2017 (CONSOLIDATED)) ____________________
____________________ Before: Hon Lam VP, Barma and Au JJA in Court Date of Written Submissions: 7 July 2020 Date of Judgment: 30 July 2020 ________________________ JUDGMENT ________________________ Hon Lam VP (giving the Judgment of the Court): 1.On 23 June 2020, the Applicant filed a Notice of Motion to apply for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal against this Court’s (Lam VP and Barma JA) judgment of 11 June 2020. 2.Section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, Cap 484 provides that an appeal shall lie to the Court of Final Appeal (“CFA”) at the discretion of this Court or the CFA if the question involved in the appeal is one which, by reason of its great general or public importance, or otherwise, ought to be submitted to the CFA for decision. 3.The Applicant set out the following matters in his Notice of Motion to seek leave to appeal:
4.The matters raised in the Notice of Motion are vague and general assertions. They do not give rise to any reasonably arguable grounds of appeal. 5.In the Applicant’s written submissions of 7 July 2020, a substantial portion consists of general statements of law, without showing how those statements specifically relate to this application for leave to appeal. The rest are statements about his predicament without pinpointing any errors or otherwise engaging with the reasons for dismissal of his appeal set out in the judgment of 11 June 2020. 6.All in all, we do not consider there is any question of great general or public importance or otherwise ought to be submitted to the CFA for determination. 7.For these reasons, we refuse to grant leave to appeal to the CFA, and dismiss the Applicant’s Notice of Motion.
The applicant acting in person |
Cases cited in this judgment
Other judgments that cite this case
Further hearings and rulings under CACV 518/2019