Read the full judgment text of FAMV 41/2011 on BabelCite. This Court of Final Appeal judgment was delivered on 6 January 2012 before Bokhary PJ, Chan PJ, Ribeiro PJ.
Civil procedure – leave to appeal – application for leave to appeal from CACV 115 of 2009 – whether leave should be granted on two questions set out in the written application – whether the questions should be reformulated – Court of Final Appeal – miscellaneous civil proceedings – application dated 18 November 2011 – MOK CHARLES PETER as applicant – TAM WAI HO as 1st Respondent – VINCENT FUNG HAO-YIN as 2nd Respondent (Department of Justice, appearance excused) – counsel for applicant: Mr Martin Lee SC, Mr Hectar Pun and Mr Lee Siu Him (instructed by Messrs Ho, Tse, Wai & Partners) – counsel for 1st Respondent: Mr Daniel Fung SC and Ms Teresa Wu (instructed by Messrs DLA Piper Hong Kong) – Appeal Committee of Bokhary PJ, Chan PJ and Ribeiro PJ determined on 6 January 2012 – leave to appeal granted on the two questions set out on page 2 of the written application – committee observed the issues may possibly be best reached by some reformulation of one or both questions, without taking it upon itself to offer any specific reformulation.
Outcome: Leave to appeal granted to the applicant on the two questions set out on page 2 of the written application dated 18 November 2011; the Appeal Committee observed that the essence of the points at issue may possibly be best reached by some reformulation of one or both questions, without offering any specific reformulation.