CHAN HO YIN v. THE HOSPITAL AUTHORITY AND OTHERS
HTML content
FAMV000011/2000
(Not for Circulation)
FAMV No. 11 of 2000
IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 11 OF 2000 (CIVIL)
(ON APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL
FROM CACV NO. 313 OF 1999, CACV NO. 342 OF 1999 AND
CACV No. 360 OF 1999)
__________________
| Between: | ||
| CHAN HO YIN | Applicant | |
| AND | ||
| THE HOSPITAL AUTHORITY | Respondents | |
| THE KWONG WAH HOSPITAL | ||
| LAM KAM WAH | ||
| HUNG WAI KA | ||
| SIN FU PING | ||
| LAI FOOK MING, LAWRENCE |
___________________
Appeal Committee: Mr Justice Litton PJ, Mr. Justice Bokhary PJ & Mr. Justice Silke NPJ
Date of Hearing: 27 June 2000
Date of Determination: 27 June 2000
_________________________
D E T E R M I N A T I O N
_________________________
Mr Justice Silke N.P.J.
1. This is the determination of the Appeal Committee.
2. The applicant brought an action in December 1998 against a number of defendants for medical negligence and alleged a conspiracy.
3. In February 1999 she instituted further proceedings of a similar nature naming the same and additional defendants.
4. Those two proceedings were consolidated in March 1999.
5. There were a number of interlocutory summons filed by the applicant which were not successful.
6. A striking out application by some of the defendants named was successful.
7. The applicant appealed those results to the Court of First Instance and, not succeeding, to the Court of Appeal. Those appeals in CACV 342/99 AND CACV 360/99 were dismissed on 21 January 2000.
8. She applied to the Court of Appeal for leave to appeal to this Court. That application was refused on 16 March 2000.
9. In CACV 313/99 the applicant's appeal on related matters to the Court of Appeal was dismissed on the 24 February 2000.
10. She sought leave to appeal to this Court and on 14 April 2000 that application was dismissed.
11. On the 11 April the applicant renewed her application for leave in respect of the decisions in CACV 342/99, CACV 360/99 and CACV 313/99.
12. Neither the papers placed before us nor anything which has been said by the representative of the applicant persuades us that this matter should go further.
13. The applications for leave are dismissed.
| (Henry Litton) | (Kemal Bokhary) | (William Silke) |
| Permanent Judge | Permanent Judge | Non-Permanent Judge |
Representation:
Applicant represented by Mr Lo Hon Sing.
Johnson Stokes & Master for the Respondents being absent.