Read the full judgment text of DCCJ 888/2010 on BabelCite. This District Court judgment was delivered on 20 July 2011 before 陳美蘭.
Civil law – leave to appeal – District Court Ordinance s.63A(2) – reasonable prospect of success – whether new evidence should be admitted on appeal – Ladd v Marshall test – appellate restraint on factual findings. The plaintiff sued the defendant in DCCJ 888/2010 over a cheque issued by the defendant. The defendant contended that the cheque was issued by mistake by its director Mr Lai. The trial judge rejected the contention and gave judgment for the plaintiff on 13 June 2011. The defendant applied for leave to appeal and for a stay of execution. Whether leave to appeal should be granted under s.63A(2) of the District Court Ordinance, requiring a reasonable prospect of success or other reasons in the interests of justice – the court held that the defendant had merely repeated arguments already addressed at trial, without identifying any error in fact or law. Under the principle in 丁國強 訴 譚狄遠（譯音）[2002] HKCFAR 336, an appellate court will not lightly interfere with a trial judge's factual findings unless plainly wrong. Whether fresh evidence in Ms Wu's affidavit should be admitted on appeal under the Ladd v Marshall [1954] 1 WLR 1489 three-condition test (reasonable diligence, important influence on result, apparent credibility) – the court held that the conditions were not satisfied because the matters were long available, the defendant gave no reason for not raising them at trial, and the new bank statement did not relate to the account on which the cheque was drawn and would not have materially affected the result, since the court's decision rested on a finding that the cheque was not issued by mistake rather than on insufficient funds. The application for leave to appeal was refused, the application for stay of execution was dismissed, and the defendant was ordered to pay the costs of the plaintiff's application.
Legal issues: Whether leave to appeal should be granted under s.63A(2) of the District Court Ordinance · Whether fresh evidence from Ms Wu's affidavit should be admitted on appeal
Outcome: Leave to appeal refused; application for stay of execution of the original judgment dismissed.
Cited by 662 cases