F. Standing of applicant

F. Standing of applicant

According to section 21K(3) of the High Court Ordinance (Cap. 4), the Court shall not grant leave unless it considers that the applicant has sufficient interest in the matter to which the application relates.  This is a jurisdictional requirement and the Court does not have discretion otherwise.

There are broadly speaking two types of standing: (1) personal standing and (2) representative standing. 

If the decision affected the applicant’s personal right or interest, the applicant has personal standing.

If the applicant was effectively pursuing the application as a representative of the public interest, the court would adopt a holistic approach by taking into account a host of relevant considerations including the merits of the application, the importance of vindicating the rule of law, the importance of the issue raised, the existence and absence of any other challengers who had a greater interest in the matter, and the nature of the breach of duty against which relief was sought. This is referred to as representative standing.

However, note that an applicant is not to be regarded as having a sufficient interest merely because the issue raised by him is of public interest, or because of the strong merits of the proposed challenge: See the Court of Appeal’s discussion in Kwok Cheuk Kin v President of Legislative Council [2021] 1 HKLRD 1247.