A V. B

[2025] HKCA 965 Court of Appeal 30 October 2025 • CAMP178/2025 • 20 min read

7 cases cited (0 HK, 7 foreign)

Outcome

Application dismissed

we dismissed the application for leave to appeal with costs.

Source: [2025] HKCA 965, Court of Appeal, decided 30 October 2025. Read directly from the judgment.

Judges (2)

Au Coram G Lam Coram

Counsel (5)

King & Wood Mallesons Firm Lee Law Firm Firm Charlie Liu Counsel Defendant Jenkin Suen Counsel Defendant Jiang Zixin Counsel Plaintiff

Case Significance

A v B [2025] HKCA 965 was an application for leave to appeal before the Court of Appeal, engaging provisions of the High Court Ordinance and the Rules of the High Court, following the decision below in [2025] HKCFI 3755. Among the authorities considered was New Sparkle Roll International Group Ltd and Another v Sze Ching Lau and Another (and 1 other) [2024] HKCA 336. The Court of Appeal held: "we dismissed the application for leave to appeal with costs."

Summary

In anonymised proceedings between A and B, the Court of Appeal determined an appeal in a civil matter. The parties' identities were anonymised. The Court of Appeal issued its judgment.

What did the Court of Appeal decide in A v B [2025] HKCA 965?

The Court of Appeal held: "we dismissed the application for leave to appeal with costs," following the decision below in [2025] HKCFI 3755, after considering authorities including New Sparkle Roll International Group Ltd and Another v Sze Ching Lau and Another [2024] HKCA 336.

What legislation was engaged in A v B [2025] HKCA 965?

The judgment in A v B [2025] HKCA 965 engaged provisions of the High Court Ordinance and the Rules of the High Court in the context of an application for leave to appeal, which the Court of Appeal dismissed with costs.