Lsw v. Lmym

HCMP 1041/2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 1041 OF 2008

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM FCMC 11418/2004)

----------------------

----------------------

Before: Hon Tang VP and A Cheung J

Dates of Further Submissions (with duplication): 11, 21 & 23 July 2008

Date of Further Judgment: 21 August 2008

--------------------------------------------

F U R T H E R    J U D G M E N T

----------------------------------------------

Hon A Cheung J (giving the judgment of the Court):

Striking out, RPO and RAO

1.We handed down judgment on 7 July 2008, which dealt with the substantive application for leave to appeal.  In our judgment, we said, for the reasons we gave there, we were provisionally minded to strike out the appeal in CACV 43/2008 (para 38), and to make against the applicant a restricted proceedings order (RPO) (para 38) and a restricted application order (RAO) (para 39).  We directed the applicant to lodge written submission with the Court within 14 days if she should wish to be heard on the matter and indicated that the matter would then be decided by the Court accordingly (para 43).

2.The Court has since received submissions (some in the form of affidavits) from the applicant.

3.Having considered those submissions, we take the view that the appeal in CACV 43/2008 (para 38) should be struck out, and a RPO as well as a RAO, in terms of what we have indicated in our earlier judgment, should be made against the applicant.  The submissions made by the applicant, insofar as they are comprehensible, essentially reiterate her case on the substantive disputes, which have been decided by the courts in the proceedings concerned.  They do not provide any reason against our making the intended orders.  Rather, they reinforce our belief that they are the right orders to make.

4.We so order.

The applicant, appearing in person