Lch v. Wspn
Read the full judgment text of CAMP 26/2024 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 29 July 2024 before Hon Chu VP and Cheung JA.
Family law – committal – extension of time – appeal as of right – costs – Petitioner granted 14 days extension to serve Notice of Appeal due to misunderstanding regarding leave to appeal – Respondent's costs in cause of appeal – Court noted Judge below erred in not dealing with application to vary consent order first
Legal issues: Extension of time for Notice of Appeal · Costs of the application
Outcome: Extension of time granted; Costs awarded to Respondent
Cites 2 cases
|
CAMP 26/2024, [2024] HKCA 739 On Intended Appeal From [2023] HKFC 254 and [2023] HKFC 257 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF APPEAL MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 26 OF 2024 (ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM FCMC NO. 1936 OF 2020) ________________________
________________ DECISION ________________ Hon Cheung JA (giving the Decision of the Court) : 1.We will grant an extension of time of 14 days from the date of this Decision to the Petitioner to serve and file a Notice of Appeal. It is clear that the delay by the Petitioner in serving a Notice of Appeal was caused by his misunderstanding that leave to appeal was required instead of him being entitled to appeal as of right against an order for committal. It is also reasonably arguable that the Judge below had erred in not dealing first with his application to vary the consent order of 30 November 2020 in respect of the provision for the payment of the children’s school fees before considering the committal application. 2.Costs of the application be the Respondent’s costs in the cause of the appeal.
Ip & Heathfield, Solicitors for the Petitioner Respondent, unrepresented, acting in person | ||||||||||||||||||
Cases cited in this judgment