HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Miscellaneous Proceedings2018

AKHTER RANA SHAHID v. DIRECTOR OF LEGAL AID

Related cases with same parties

  • CACV375/2001COMMON LUCK INVESTMENT LTD v. DIRECTOR OF LEGAL AID
  • CACV8/2015AKHTER RANA SHAHID v. IMMIGRATION DEPARTMENT AND OTHERS
  • DCMP1127/2017DIRECTOR OF LEGAL AID v. KOLJONEN YICK SUK HAN Formerly known as YICK SUK HAN
  • FACV1/2002COMMON LUCK INVESTMENT LTD. v. DIRECTOR OF LEGAL AID
  • FACV8/2023MK v. DIRECTOR OF LEGAL AID
  • FAMV179/2023MK v. DIRECTOR OF LEGAL AID
  • HCA822/2017AGACER JAMES C. v. DIRECTOR OF LEGAL AID
  • HCAA20/1999NGUYEN TRONG SON v. DIRECTOR OF LEGAL AID
  • HCAA675/2017XY v. DIRECTOR OF LEGAL AID
  • HCAA702/2013MARTNOK THANRADEE v. DIRECTOR OF LEGAL AID
  • HCAL1025/2018TAMANG SAMJHANA v. DIRECTOR OF LEGAL AID
  • HCAL122/2015羅允彤 對 法律援助署署長
  • HCAL1789/2023LUU VAN HOC alias LUU VAN HOI v. DIRECTOR OF LEGAL AID
  • HCAL418/2020YUEN OI YEE LISA v. DIRECTOR OF LEGAL AID
  • HCAL470/2019AHMAD ALI v. DIRECTOR OF LEGAL AID
  • HCAL923/2020WEERA NARAYANA MUDALIGE BASILE FONSEKA v. DIRECTOR OF LEGAL AID
[2018] HKCA 187-EN-2018-03-26

AKHTER RANA SHAHID v. DIRECTOR OF LEGAL AID

HTML content

CAMP 12/2018

[2018] HKCA 187

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 12 OF 2018

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL NO. 51 of 2015)

________________________

BETWEEN  
AKHTER RANA SHAHIDApplicant
and
DIRECTOR OF LEGAL AIDProposed
Respondent

________________________

Before : Hon Cheung and Chu JJA in Court
Date of Proposed Respondent’s Written Submissions : 26 February 2018
Date of Applicant’s Written Submissions : 27 February 2018
Date of Decision : 26 March 2018

________________________

D E C I S I O N

________________________

Hon Cheung JA (giving Decision of the Court) :

1.  On 28 April 2015 Au J refused the applicant’s application for leave to apply for judicial review against the decision of the Director of Legal Aid.

2.  On 7 February 2018 the applicant applied for extension of time to appeal against Au J’s decision.  We will now consider the application on paper. 

3.  We will refuse the application as another division of this Court (Barma and Poon JJA) had on 29 March 2016 in HCMP 234/2016 already considered and refused an application by the applicant for extension of time to appeal against the decision of Au J. 

4.  The applicant did not further challenge the decision given on 29 March 2016.

5.  As the applicant’s application had already been considered by this Court, it is an abuse of process for the applicant to apply again to this Court to obtain the same relief.  Accordingly, the application is dismissed with costs to the proposed respondent.

(Peter Cheung)(Carlye Chu)
Justice of AppealJustice of Appeal

The applicant, unrepresented

Ms Bonnie Chung, Government Counsel, of Department of Justice, for the proposed respondent