(Not for circulation)
IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 30 OF 1999 (CIVIL)
(ON APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL
FROM CACV NO. 171 OF 1999)
Appeal Committee: Chief Justice Li, Mr Justice Litton PJ and Mr Justice Bokhary PJ and
Date of Hearing: 28 July 2000
Date of Determination: 28 July 2000
D E T E R M I N A T I O N
Mr Justice Litton PJ:
1. This application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal was dismissed by the Appeal Committee on 19 January 2000. The AppealCommittee in giving its determination said that the applicant was legally represented at the first trial. That was a mistake. Infact he was in person.
2. Complaining of that mistake and raising other matters as well, the applicant seeks in effect a reconsideration of his leave application.
3. In the light of that mistake, this leave application has been re-listed. We have heard the applicant’s further submissions. The mistakemade no difference whatsoever to the result.
4. The applicant also says that he had obtained judgment against only the 2nd defendant even though the Appeal Committee said in givingits determination that he had obtained judgment against both defendants. It would make no difference whatsoever to the result evenif he had obtained judgment against only the 2nd defendant. As it happens, however, the judgment which he obtained was against bothdefendants, just as the Appeal Committee said. This is accepted before us by counsel for both respondents i.e. the 1st and 2nd defendantsat trial.
5. There is no basis for re-opening the application. It stands dismissed. No order as to costs. That concludes these proceedings.
Mr CHAN Siu-lun, the applicant in person
Mr LAW Man-chung (instructed by Messrs T.S. Tong & Co.) for the respondents