Leung Suk Fong v. Chiu Wai Ming
Read the full judgment text of FAMV 25/1999 on BabelCite. This FAMV judgment was delivered on 27 January 2000.
1. This application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal arises out of a landlord and tenant dispute. The Lands Tribunal awarded the landlord $1,000 costs against the tenant . The Court of Appeal allowed the tenant 's appeal, and set aside that order for costs against her. Neither party was legally represented in the Court of Appeal, and that Court ordered that: "Both parties shall bear its own costs of appeal".
|
FAMV000025/1999 FAMV No. 25 of 1999 IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 25 OF 1999 (CIVIL) (ON APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL FROM CACV NO. 112 OF 1999) _____________________
_____________________ Appeal Committee: Mr Justice Litton, PJ, Mr Justice Ching PJ and Mr Justice Bokhary PJ Date of Hearing: 27 January 2000 Date of Determination: 27 January 2000 ___________________________ DETERMINATION ___________________________ Mr Justice Bokhary PJ: 1. This application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal arises out of a landlord and tenant dispute. The Lands Tribunal awarded the landlord $1,000 costs against the tenant. The Court of Appeal allowed the tenant's appeal, and set aside that order for costs against her. Neither party was legally represented in the Court of Appeal, and that Court ordered that: "Both parties shall bear its own costs of appeal". 2. The tenant then applied to the Court of Appeal for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal. She wishes to ask the Court of Final Appeal to do three things. The first is to award her the costs which she incurred in her appeal to the Court of Appeal. The second is to award her damages for mental suffering. And the third is to punish the landlord under s.119V of the Landlord and Tenant (Consolidation) Ordinance, Cap. 7, on the ground that the landlord had made improper use of the judicial process with a view to forcing her out of the premises. 3. The Court of Appeal saw no good reason for granting the tenant leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal. She now asks us to grant her such leave. Like the Court of Appeal, we see no good reason for doing so. Leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal is refused.
Representation: Mr Pun Chi-fai was permitted to speak on behalf of the applicant. Mr Lem Man-hai who attended on behalf of the respondent was not called upon. |
Further hearings and rulings under FAMV 25/1999