Read the full judgment text of FAMV 000054/2007 on BabelCite. This FAMV judgment was delivered on 14 January 2008 before Bokhary PJ, Chan PJ, Ribeiro PJ.
Civil procedure – disciplinary proceedings – application for leave to appeal – application to re-open – Court of Final Appeal – jurisdiction – inherent jurisdiction – exceptional circumstances – Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal – clerk to Tribunal from same firm as chairman – alleged financial interest – fact-specific procedural irregularities – whether jurisdiction to re-open a matter already determined by the Court of Final Appeal – held no jurisdiction and no basis for re-opening – application dismissed – costs of HK$120,000 awarded to respondent – Whether the Court of Appeal had jurisdiction to re-open a matter already determined by the Court of Final Appeal – held no – the Court of Appeal's decision that it lacked jurisdiction was correct and gave no basis for an appeal – Whether the Court of Final Appeal should re-open the matter under its inherent jurisdiction – held no – the underlying issues and merits did not justify re-opening, a course available only in wholly exceptional circumstances – there was no question of the chairman having a financial interest because the clerk would have been paid whatever the outcome – contested fact-specific procedural irregularities gave no basis for leave or re-opening – application dismissed with costs of HK$120,000 to the respondent.
Legal issues: Whether the Court of Appeal had jurisdiction to re-open a matter already determined by the Court of Final Appeal · Whether the Court of Final Appeal should re-open the matter under its inherent jurisdiction
Outcome: Application for leave to appeal dismissed; application to re-open dismissed.