Joshua Ong v. Malaysian Airline System Berhad
Read the full judgment text of CACV 283/2007 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 13 January 2009.
1. We have given the submissions careful consideration. We do not propose to grant leave ourselves to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal, although we accept the explanation for the delay that has occurred. No more need be said about that, as far as we are concerned.
|
CACV 283/2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF APPEAL CIVIL APPEAL NO. 283 OF 2007 (ON APPEAL FROM DCPI NO. 1542 OF 2006) ----------------------
---------------------- Before: Hon Rogers VP, Suffiad J and Wright J in Court Date of Hearing: 13 January 2009 Date of Judgment: 13 January 2009
Hon Rogers VP: 1.We have given the submissions careful consideration. We do not propose to grant leave ourselves to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal, although we accept the explanation for the delay that has occurred. No more need be said about that, as far as we are concerned. 2.The question of whether a matter is of great general or public importance is always a difficult question to decide. There are points of law which arise in this case, as is quite clear from the fact that the court was divided. 3.However, we think that it is better to leave it to the Court of Final Appeal to decide whether they consider the issues that arise here are of great general or public importance. For that reason we do not propose to give leave ourselves.
Mr Mohan Bharwaney SC, instructed by Messrs Wong & Chan, for the Plaintiff/Applicant Mr Alexander Stock, instructed by Messrs Clyde & Co., for the Defendant/Respondent Appeal allowed: see FAMV6/2009 dated 27 March 2009 |
Further hearings and rulings under CACV 283/2007