Hui Yiu-wing v. The Regional Council and Another
Read the full judgment text of CACV 542/2001 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 12 June 2002.
1. This application has caused us some concern. We are satisfied that it is a section 22(1)(b) application and that the main point which arises for consideration is the "or otherwise" provision.
Cited by 1 case
|
CACV000542A/2001 CACV 542/2001 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF APPEAL CIVIL APPEAL NO. 542 OF 2001 (ON APPEAL FROM HCPI 31 OF 1998) ______________
______________ Coram: Hon Mayo VP, Yeung JA and Lugar-Mawson J in Court Date of Hearing: 12 June 2002 Date of Decision: 12 June 2002 _______________ D E C I S I O N _______________ Hon Mayo VP (giving the decision of the Court): 1.This application has caused us some concern. We are satisfied that it is a section 22(1)(b) application and that the main point which arises for consideration is the "or otherwise" provision. 2.While we have every sympathy for this plaintiff we are not convinced that this is a case where it would be right for us to grant leave. 3.The important point to bear in mind was the paucity of the evidence which was placed before us on 4 December 2001 in support of the application to adduce further evidence. We were not seized of an application for an adjournment so that sufficient evidence could be placed before us to enable us to exercise our discretion in a sensible manner. 4.On the basis of the material which is before us we would not have been justified in making the order which was sought. 5.In all the circumstances we decline to grant leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.
Representation: Mr Neville Sarony, SC, instructed by Messrs Hastings & Co., for the Plaintiff. Mr Alan Leong, SC instructed by Messrs Tsang, Chan & Wong, for the 1st defendant. |
Other judgments that cite this case
Further hearings and rulings under CACV 542/2001