Read the full judgment text of DCPI 1970/2008 on BabelCite. This District Court judgment was delivered on 12 January 2010 before Her Honour Judge Mimmie Chan.
Civil law – personal injuries action – appeal – leave to appeal – findings of fact – appellate restraint – Ting Kwok Keung v Tam Dick Yuen FACV 12/2001 – defendant unrepresented at trial – alleged inconsistencies in plaintiff's evidence not raised at trial – whether leave to appeal should be granted – application by defendant to challenge trial judge's preference for plaintiff's evidence over defendant's evidence – plaintiff's testimony in magistracy proceedings and police statements relied on by counsel – none of the alleged contradictions put to plaintiff at trial – defendant gave no address on inconsistencies at trial – unfairness in raising new challenges on appeal – principle that trial judge's choice of whom to believe is entitled to great respect irrespective of express credibility observations – appellate court will not set aside trial judge's findings unless satisfied the conclusion is plainly wrong – trial judge has first-hand advantages in seeing and hearing witnesses – inherent imprecision in expressed findings captures emphasis, weight and nuance not fully articulable – proposed appeal has no realistic prospects of success – no reason in the interests of justice why appeal should be heard – leave to appeal refused – application dismissed with costs and Certificate for Counsel – Ting Kwok Keung v Tam Dick Yuen FACV 12/2001 followed – Clarke v Edinburgh Tramways, Whitehouse v Jordan, Abalos v Australian Postal Commission, Powell v Streatham Manor Nursing Home, Biogen Inc v Medeva Plc and Piglowska v Piglowski cited for principles of appellate restraint in reviewing findings of fact.
Legal issues: Whether leave to appeal should be granted to challenge findings of fact based on alleged inconsistencies not raised at trial
Outcome: Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
Cited by 10 cases · Cites 1 case