Royal Skandia Life Assurance Ltd v. Sparkle Consultants (Hong Kong) Ltd and Others

HCMP 1453/2006

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 1453 OF 2006

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM DCCJ 2837/2005)

______________________

BETWEEN

______________________

Before : Hon Cheung JA and Yeung JA in Court

Date of Hearing : 20 December 2006

Date of Decision : 20 December 2006

Date of Reasons for Decision : 22 December 2006

____________________________

REASONS FOR DECISION

____________________________

Hon Cheung JA (giving judgment of the court) :

1.The 3^rd defendant sought leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal against our judgment of 25 September 2006.  We dismissed the application and we now give our reasons.

2.Our judgment was to refuse leave to the 3^rd defendant to appeal against the decision of H H Judge Chow who had refused his application to stay the plaintiff’s action against him.

3.Leave to appeal is required for appeals from the District Court to the Court of Appeal.  It has been clearly established by the Court of Final Appeal in HL v. MTC and LHN [2004] 3 HKLRD 241 that where leave to appeal is refused, there is no appeal against that decision.  This case comes within this principle and this means there will be no appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.  In any event, none of the conditions set out in section 22(1) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance is fulfilled. 

4.Accordingly the application was dismissed.

3^rd Defendant, in person, present.