AIM GLOBAL HOLDINGS LTD AND OTHERS v. CHIEN KUN ALLEN AND ANOTHER

AIM GLOBAL HOLDINGS LTD AND OTHERS v. CHIEN KUN ALLEN AND ANOTHER

The court found no evidence of a binding undertaking by defendants to restrict valuation dates, accepted that the amendments were prompted by changed circumstances and expert material, allowed both amendment summonses, ordered that the disputed amendment costs (including the hearing) be costs in the cause of the defendants' counterclaim, and dismissed plaintiffs' application for leave to appeal out of time as having no real prospect of success.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 939
Parties
Plaintiff (original Action); Defendant (counterclaim; Defendant in HCA 2495/2014): AIM Global Holdings Limited; 2nd Plaintiff (original Action); 2nd Defendant (counterclaim): Lily Liu Durr; 3rd Plaintiff (original Action); 3rd Defendant (counterclaim): Shanghai Weicon Optical Co. Ltd; 1st Defendant (original Action); 1st Plaintiff (counterclaim); Plaintiff (hca 2495/2014): Chien Kun Allen; 2nd Defendant (original Action); 2nd Plaintiff (counterclaim): Rising Dragon Global Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
12 April 2019
Case Number
HCA2217/2014
Procedural Posture
Consolidated Civil Action (contract Disputes) / Costs Ruling Following Interlocutory Applications and Case Management Hearing
Outcome
Amendment summonses allowed; P's summons withdrawn with costs to defendants; part of counterclaim (Share Award Agreement) to be tried first on liability; disputed amendment costs to be in the cause of defendants' counterclaim; plaintiffs' application for leave to appeal out of time dismissed.
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Split Trial, Costs Orders, Valuation Date for Damages, Abuse of Process
Source Language
EN

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AIM Global Holdings Limited

Plaintiff (original Action); Defendant (counterclaim; Defendant in HCA 2495/2014)

Lily Liu Durr

2nd Plaintiff (original Action); 2nd Defendant (counterclaim)

Shanghai Weicon Optical Co. Ltd

3rd Plaintiff (original Action); 3rd Defendant (counterclaim)

Chien Kun Allen

1st Defendant (original Action); 1st Plaintiff (counterclaim); Plaintiff (hca 2495/2014)

Rising Dragon Global Limited

2nd Defendant (original Action); 2nd Plaintiff (counterclaim)

Procedural Posture

Consolidated Civil Action (contract Disputes) / Costs Ruling Following Interlocutory Applications and Case Management Hearing

  1. 1 Whether the defendants should be permitted to amend their defence and counterclaim to add alternative valuation dates
  2. 2 Whether those amendments impermissibly revise or contradict an alleged earlier undertaking to the court
  3. 3 Whether costs of the disputed amendment applications (including this hearing) should be payable and by whom

Ratio Decidendi

The court found no evidence of a binding undertaking by defendants to restrict valuation dates, accepted that the amendments were prompted by changed circumstances and expert material, allowed both amendment summonses, ordered that the disputed amendment costs (including the hearing) be costs in the cause of the defendants' counterclaim, and dismissed plaintiffs' application for leave to appeal out of time as having no real prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Amendment summonses allowed; P's summons withdrawn with costs to defendants; part of counterclaim (Share Award Agreement) to be tried first on liability; disputed amendment costs to be in the cause of defendants' counterclaim; plaintiffs' application for leave to appeal out of time dismissed.

Orders

  • Plaintiffs' summons (Liu #5) withdrawn with costs to defendants
  • Both the 1st and 2nd Amendment Summonses allowed with consequential directions