Read the full judgment text of CACV 751/2000 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 14 September 2001 before Mayo VP, Stock JA, Cheung JA.
Civil procedure – leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal – section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, Cap.484 – 'otherwise be submitted to the Court of Final Appeal for decision' – employees' compensation claim under the Employees' Compensation Ordinance, Cap.282 – applicant awarded HK$980,469 for workplace injuries – main issue whether applicant was employee or sub-contractor – Court of Appeal (Mayo VP, Wong & Stock JJA) reversed District Court decision of Deputy Judge Lok – no retrial ordered – applicant seeks leave to appeal to CFA – no question of great general or public importance – whether leave should be granted under the 'otherwise be submitted' limb – stringent test for leave under section 22(1)(b) – exceptional circumstances required where amount in dispute is less than statutory threshold – test from Hui Shiu Wing v. Cheung Yuk Lin [1968] HKLR 176 applied – Court of Appeal had 'considerable disquiet' that it may have substituted its own view of the evidence rather than being satisfied that the trial judge was plainly wrong – correct test for appellate interference with findings of fact – amount awarded only slightly less than threshold in section 22(1)(a) – no retrial ordered – denial of leave would deny applicant a good prospect of success and an award to which he may be fully entitled – interests of justice require leave to be granted – leave granted – costs of the application to be costs in the cause of the appeal
Legal issues: Whether leave to appeal to the CFA should be granted under section 22(1)(b) of Cap.484 in the absence of a question of great general or public importance
Outcome: Leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal granted to the applicant.
Cited by 1 case · Cites 1 case