MA BIK YUNG v. KO CHUEN

CACV 267/99

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 267 OF 1999

(ON APPEAL FROM DCEO 1/1997)

______________________________

_____________

D E C I S I O N

_____________

Hon Mayo VP (giving the decision of the Court):

1. The application is refused. We do not consider that an arguable case has been made out that the wrong test was applied by the Court of Appeal.

2. The test is sufficiently set out in ss. 6 and 8 of the Disability Discrimination Ordinance, Cap. 487 in relation to discrimination and in s. 38 in relation to harassment.

3. We do not think that it is arguable that the court chose the wrong comparator.

4. So far as the apology is concerned in our judgment we said at p. 15:

"The next point to be considered is whether the Judge was right to order the defendant to tender to the plaintiff an apology.

Section 72(4)(b) of the Ordinance provides that the court may 'order that the respondent shall perform any reasonable act or course of conduct to redress any loss or damage suffered by the claimant'."

5. In our view a hollow apology does not come within s. 72(4)(b).

6. It is also our view that the requirements of s. 22(1)(b) of the Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, Cap. 484 have not been met.