HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Miscellaneous Proceedings (Criminal)2004

THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF No.10 BONHAM STRAND AND ANOTHER v. HKSAR

Related cases with same parties

  • CAAR11/1997HKSAR v. YIP CHI TUNG
  • CAAR1/1998HKSAR v. LING VERONICA
  • CAAR12/1996HKSAR v. WONG KWONG YICK
  • CAAR6/1998HKSAR v. LAU SHIU KONG AND ANOTHER
  • CAAR6/2012HKSAR v. LEUNG KWOK CHI
  • CAAR9/2001HKSAR v. WONG TO LEUNG
  • CACC100/1997HKSAR v. YU HON CHUN
  • CACC100/1999HKSAR v. LAM CHI KIN
  • CACC100/2000HKSAR v. SHING KUEN KIN
  • CACC100/2001HKSAR v. OU YANG MING CHYUAN
  • CACC100/2002HKSAR v. CHAN LAI SING AND ANOTHER
  • CACC100/2003HKSAR v. CHENG CHONG SHING
  • CACC100/2022HKSAR v. LIMBU PRASHANT
  • CACC101/1997HKSAR v. YIU KENNETH LIK KIN
  • CACC101/2001HKSAR v. LEUNG KWAI PING
  • CACC101/2021HKSAR v. WONG CHI FUNG AND ANOTHER
  • CACC10/1997HKSAR v. MAN KAM SHING
  • CACC10/1998HKSAR v. CHAN CHUN TAK
  • CACC10/2001HKSAR v. TAM KWAI KEUNG AND ANOTHER
  • CACC10/2002HKSAR v. WONG WAN SHAN
43502-EN-2004-10-27

THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF No.10 BONHAM STRAND AND ANOTHER v. HKSAR

HTML content

FAMC No. 41 of 2004

IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 41 OF 2004 (CRIMINAL)

(ON APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL
FROM HCMA NO. 239 OF 2004)

_____________________

Between:

THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF No.10 BONHAM STRAND1st Applicant
MEE KOON IMITATION JEWELLERY COMPANY LIMITED2nd Applicant
and 
 HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGIONRespondent

_____________________

 

Appeal Committee: Mr Justice Bokhary PJ, Mr Justice Chan PJ and Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ

Date of Hearing: 27 October 2004

Date of Determination: 27 October 2004

___________________________

D E T E R M I N A T I O N

___________________________

Mr Justice Bokhary PJ:

1. Our having heard Mr Choy Bing Wing on behalf of the applicants should not be taken as an indication that someone in his position will in future be heard on behalf of parties in their position.

2. Turning to the substance of the application, the arguments advanced in support of the application do not match the point certified by McMahon J.  And no alternative point has been formulated with sufficient clarity to justify permitting it to be taken to the Court of Final Appeal.  Accordingly leave to appeal is refused.

 

 

(Kemal Bokhary)(Patrick Chan)(R.A.V. Ribeiro)
Permanent JudgePermanent JudgePermanent Judge

With the Appeal Committee’s permission, Mr Choy Bing Wing was heard on behalf of the applicants

Mr John Reading SC and Ms Virginia Lau (of the Department of Justice) for the respondent