TSE JEEKEEN v. “H.K. ALLIANCE IN SUPPORT OF PATRIOTIC DEMOCRATIC MOVEMENT OF CHINA” & ITS CHAIRMAN MR. SZETO WAH AND OTHERS

CACV000246A/2000

CACV 246/2000

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 246 OF 2000

(ON APPEAL FROM HCA 14 OF 2000)

BETWEEN
Tse Jeekeen Plaintiff
AND
1. “H.K. alliance in support of patriotic democratic movement of China” & its chairman Mr. Szeto Wah Defendants
2. “H.K. Democratic Party” & its chairman Mr. Lee Chui Ming (Martin)
3. Mr. Cheung Man Kong, President of “the Hong Kong professional teachers’ union”
4. “April 5 action” & its leader Mr. Leung Kwok Hung

Coram: Hon Wong and Woo JJA in Court

Date of Hearing: 5 January 2001

Date of Judgment: 5 January 2001

____________________

J U D G M E N T

____________________

Wong JA (giving the judgment of the court) :

1. The background, facts and reasons for dismissing the appeal were set out in our judgment dated 27 October 2000. There is no needfor us to repeat them here.

2. Suffice it to say that we concluded in our judgment that there were no grounds of any substance in the appeal that was before us.The applicant is dissatisfied with our decision and now seeks leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal. The criteria for leaveto appeal to the Court of Final Appeal are contained in section 22 of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, Cap. 484. Sub-section 1 reads as follows :

“An appeal shall lie to the Court in any civil cause or matter –

(a) as of right, from any final judgment of the Court of Appeal, where the matter in dispute on the appeal amounts to or is of thevalue of $1,000,000 or more, or where the appeal involves, directly or indirectly, some claim or question to or respecting propertyor some civil right amounting to or of the value of $1,000,000 or more; and

(b) at the discretion of the Court of Appeal or the Court, from any other judgment of the Court of Appeal, whether final or interlocutory,if, in the opinion of the Court of Appeal or the Court, as the case may be, the question involved in the appeal is one which, byreason of its great general or public importance, or otherwise, ought to be submitted to the Court for decision.”

3. As we have stated in our judgment in which we agreed with the decision of Chung J that the claim brought by the applicant againstthe defendants disclosed no cause of action. There was and still is no chance that he would succeed in the proceedings that he hasbrought.

4. We are satisfied in this case that there is no ground of appeal of any substance to be considered by the Court of Final Appeal andaccordingly we dismiss the application for leave and we also order the costs of this application to be borne by the applicant.

(Michael Wong) (K H Woo)
Justice of Appeal Justice of Appeal

Representation:

Plaintiff (Applicant), TSE Jeekeen, in person

Mr Y L Cheung instructed by M/S Ho, Tse, Wai & Partners for Defendants