Read the full judgment text of CACV 219/2014 and CACV 220/2014 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 20 April 2015 before Hon Lam VP and Barma JA.
Civil procedure – application for extension of time to appeal – judicial review – Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance (Cap 132) sections 104A and 104C – static demonstration – display of roadside publicity materials – rolled-up hearing – Order 53 Rule 3(4) – 14-day time limit for appeal – Legal Aid Ordinance s.15(3) and (4) – Secretary for Justice v Yaumatei Ferry Co Ltd [2001] 1 HKC 125 – whether delay is excusable – whether intended appeals have merit – retrospective extension of time granted – 8 days out of time – solicitor's error of judgment in calculating time limit – no clear authority on calculation of time limit for appeal in respect of decision in rolled-up hearing – legal aid application prolonged process – applicants acted promptly in seeking legal aid – court not prepared to say appeals had no real prospect of success – arguments on application of sections 104A and 104C to static demonstration involving display of roadside publicity materials – applicants to pay respondent's costs in any event – applicants' own costs to be taxed in accordance with Legal Aid Taxation.
Legal issues: Whether extension of time to appeal should be granted · Whether the delay in serving the Notices of Appeal was excusable · Whether the intended appeals have any merit
Outcome: Retrospective extension of time granted to the Applicants for the service of the Notices of Appeal on 6 November 2014. The appeals are allowed to proceed.
Cites 1 case