Securities and Futures Commission v. Pacific Sun Advisors Ltd and Another

HCMA 490/2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO 490 OF 2013

(ON APPEAL FROM ESS 30881 - 30884 OF 2012)

____________

____________

_______________

D E C I S I O N

_______________

1.This application for a certificate is very considerably out of time, and I am not prepared to exercise my discretion to extend time. It is said on behalf of the SFC that in addition to the fact that the delay is considerable, there is some delay for which no explanation is even offered. That is indeed so. In any event, I would not generally be minded lightly to extend time in a matter like this where the explanation for the delay is lack of funds for legal costs. If such an explanation is generally to be treated as sufficient for an extension of time, the time limit would be of little meaning or effect. There is nothing special in the circumstances.

2.I ought not lightly to facilitate a matter proceeding to the Court of Final Appeal.  Even if I were to grant a certificate, it would still be necessary for Pacific Sun to obtain leave to appeal from the Court of Final Appeal's Appeal Committee.  In all the circumstances, I will leave Pacific Sun to go, if so advised and so minded, to the Appeal Committee both for a certificate and for leave.

3.For those reasons, a certificate is refused.  The SFC offered some further grounds for opposing a certificate, but it is unnecessary to deal with those further grounds.

Mr Derek Chan, instructed by the Securities and Futures Commission, for the appellant

Mr Laurence Li, instructed by Timothy Loh Solicitors, for 1^st respondent