HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Miscellaneous Proceedings (Criminal)2007

YIM SUK HAN 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
57253-EN-2007-05-31

YIM SUK HAN v. HKSAR

HTML content

FAMC No. 8 of 2007

IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 8 OF 2007 (CRIMINAL)

(ON APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL
FROM HCMA NO. 945 OF 2006)

_____________________

Between:

 YIM SUK HANApplicant
 and 
 HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGIONRespondent

_____________________

 

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

Date of Hearing : 31 May 2007

Date of Determination : 31 May 2007

 

_________________________________

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

_________________________________

 

Mr Justice Bokhary PJ :

1.  Mr Khattak has, with great industry, put forward, in writing and in oral argument, everything that can possible be advanced on the applicant’s behalf.  His task is a difficult one.  Appeals to the Court of Final Appeal on the substantial and grave injustice ground are reserved for rare and exceptional cases – so rare and exceptional as to disclose a reasonably arguable complaint of a departure from accepted norms so seriously to the complainant’s disadvantage as to justify a second criminal appeal even in the absence of any real controversy on a point of law of great and general importance, the resolution of such controversy being the primary function of the Court of Final Appeal in the administration of criminal justice.  In our view, this is not a case of that nature.  Accordingly leave to appeal is refused.

 

 

(Kemal Bokhary)
Permanent Judge
(Patrick Chan)
Permanent Judge
(RAV Ribeiro)
Permanent Judge

 

Mr Shahmim K Khattak (instructed by Messrs C K Chan & Co) for the applicant

Ms Mary Sin and Mr Isaac Tam (of the Department of Justice) for the respondent