Your World of Legal Intelligence
 Hong Kong | 1-800-335-6202

Securities And Futures Commission v Mandarin Resources Corporation Ltd. And Another

Judgment Cited in Precedent Map Related
Vincent
CourtCourt of Appeal (Hong Kong)
Judgment Date04 May 1999
Judgement NumberCACV84/1999
Subject MatterCivil Appeal
CACV000084A/1999 SECURITIES AND FUTURES COMMISSION v. MANDARIN RESOURCES CORPORATION LTD. AND ANOTHER

CACV000084A/1999

CACV 36, 45 & 84/99

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 36, 45 & 84 OF 1999

(ON APPEAL FROM HCCW NO. 348 OF 1996)

BETWEEN
SECURITIES AND FUTURES COMMISSION Petitioner
(1st Respondent)
AND
MANDARIN RESOURCES CORPORATION LIMITED 1st Respondent
CHIM PUI CHUNG 2nd Respondent
(Appellant)

-------------------

Coram: Hon Liu, JA, Leong, JA & Keith, J in Court

Date of Hearing: 4 May 1999

Date of Judgment: 4 May 1999

----------------------

J U D G M E N T

-----------------------

Liu, JA:

1. Three separate decisions were made. Mr Chim, the applicant, feels aggrieved and he has, with care and brevity, stated his grounds. We need not call upon counsel for the other side. These applications for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal are grounded on the applicant's grievances against rulings made for case management and other interim measures.

2. The decisions of the judge and those of this court are not controversies in issue between the parties which would be finally resolved whichever way the decision should go. The contentions before us would not bring about final decisions or judgments within the meaning of s. 22(1)(a) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance.

3. There are also no points of great general or public importance which would fall to be decided under s. 22(1)(b) of the same Ordinance for granting leave.

4. There are, we see, no other grounds "otherwise" which would be caught by what is known as entitlement or reasons otherwise sufficient for granting leave under s. 22(1)(b).

5. None of the three applications of Mr Chim involves matters that are within s. 22. The applications are all refused.

(Submission on costs)

6. Mr Chim's anxiety is noted and in the circumstances, the applications are dismissed with costs.

(B Liu) (Arthur Leong) (Brian Keith)
Justice of Appeal of the
Court of Appeal of the
High Court		 Justice of Appeal of the
Court of Appeal of the
High Court		 Judge of the Court of First Instance of the High Court

Representation:

Mr Philip Heslop, QC inst'd by M/S Herbert Smith for Petitioner (1st Respondent).

2nd...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT