CHEUNG MEI LING MABLE v. LEUNG SEK YIU

CACV 297/1999

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 297 OF 1999

(ON APPEAL FROM FCMC 2713 OF 1998)

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

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

J U D G M E N T

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

Nazareth V-P (giving the judgment of the Court) :

1. This is an interlocutory application from the judge below, refusing the husband an adjournment. It is not necessary to go into all the details for the following reasons. It is perfectly clear to us that the two hours for which the matter has been listed is not going to be sufficient to dispose of it. Both the parties have applied to cross-examine each other. There is no indication whatsoever that the judge picked up this point or that she gave it due consideration. We, therefore, think the result which was the refusal of the adjournment was plainly wrong. There are, of course, other minor considerations but none of them detracts from the conclusion that the inability to complete the hearing will inevitably precipitate an adjournment.

2. In those circumstances, it inevitably follows that the decision to refuse an adjournment was plainly wrong. We accordingly allow the appeal and order the adjournment sought. We now hear counsel on the precise terms of the order we should make.