Chang King To v. Wong Shuen Yuk (By Her Guardian Ad Litem Official Solicitor)
Read the full judgment text of CACV 514/2019 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 28 June 2022 before Cheung JA, Chu JA, G Lam JA.
Civil procedure – leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal – Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap. 484) s.22(1)(b) – whether question involves great general or public importance or otherwise ought to be determined by the Court of Final Appeal – threshold that issues raised must be reasonably arguable – plaintiff unrepresented – plaintiff failed to identify any question of great general or public importance – plaintiff's submissions merely repeated complaints against the Court of Appeal's earlier judgment – concurrent findings of fact by the Court of Appeal and the court below – no basis for granting leave on the 'or otherwise' limb – notice of motion dismissed.
Legal issues: Whether leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal should be granted
Outcome: Leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal refused; notice of motion dismissed.
Cites 3 cases
|
CACV 513/2019 & CACV 514/2019 [2022] HKCA 959 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF APPEAL CIVIL APPEAL NO. 513 OF 2019 (ON APPEAL FROM HCA NO. 2518 OF 2015) ________________________
________________________ AND IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF APPEAL CIVIL APPEAL NO. 514 OF 2019 (ON APPEAL FROM HCA NO. 1574 OF 2017) ________________________
________________________ (Heard Together)
________________ D E C I S I O N ________________ Hon Cheung JA (giving the Decision of the Court) : I. Leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal 1.On 4 April 2022, this Court (Cheung, Chu and G Lam JJA) handed down a judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge M K Liu given on 21 April 2021 by which he dismissed the plaintiff’s actions against the defendants. 2.The plaintiff now applies, by a notice of motion filed on 29 April 2022, for leave to appeal against our judgment to the Court of Final Appeal. II. Our view 3.Under section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap. 484) (‘Ordinance’) leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal will only be granted if the question to be determined involves great general or public importance or otherwise ought to be determined by the Court of Final Appeal. 4.The threshold for granting leave is that the issues raised must be reasonably arguable. 5.The plaintiff has not identified any issue of great general or public importance that should be considered by the Court of Final Appeal. Nor is there any such question apparent to us from the matters he has raised. In his written submissions, the plaintiff is just repeating his complaints against the judgment below. Of these complaints, this Court and the Court below have made concurrent findings of fact. The plaintiff is not able to show that it is reasonably arguable that he could overcome the high threshold of challenging these findings. 6.We also do not see any basis for granting leave on the ‘or otherwise’ limb under section 22(1)(b) of the Ordinance. III. Disposition 7.For these reasons, the notice of motion is dismissed.
The Plaintiff in CACV 513/2019 & CACV 514/2019, unrepresented, acting in person The Defendant in CACV 513/2019 and 2nd Defendant in CACV 514/2019, unrepresented The 1st Defendant in CACV 514/2019, unrepresented, acting in person |
Cases cited in this judgment
Further hearings and rulings under CACV 514/2019