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- Amendment summonses allowed; P's summons withdrawn with costs to defendants; part of counterclaim (Share Award Agreement) to be tried first on liability; disputed amendment costs to be in the cause of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.
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
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the defendants should be permitted to amend their defence and counterclaim to add alternative valuation dates
- 2 Whether those amendments impermissibly revise or contradict an alleged earlier undertaking to the court
- 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
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment