XUE BORAN AND ANOTHER v. HUI CHI SUM AND ANOTHER

XUE BORAN AND ANOTHER v. HUI CHI SUM AND ANOTHER

Granting leave was refused because the application was extremely late with no adequate explanation, the proposed amendments were substantive not merely technical and would cause serious prejudice to the plaintiffs by altering the pleaded case and disrupting imminent trial preparation; accordingly the balance...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] HKCFI 1272
Parties
1st Plaintiff: Xue Boran; 2nd Plaintiff: Yang Lixuan; 1st Defendant: Hui Chi Sum; 2nd Defendant: Yuen Sze Man
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
31 March 2023
Case Number
HCA2493/2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Action / Pre Trial (application to Amend Pleadings, Trial Listed 17 April 2023)
Outcome
Application to amend refused; defendants ordered to pay plaintiffs' costs on an indemnity basis, summarily assessed at HKD 45,000, payable by 14 April 2023; no further interlocutory applications without prior leave of the trial judge.
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Duress, Prejudice, Interlocutory Applications, Indemnity Costs
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Contract Evidence Costs Amendment of Pleadings Duress Prejudice Interlocutory Applications +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Xue Boran

1st Plaintiff

Yang Lixuan

2nd Plaintiff

Hui Chi Sum

1st Defendant

Yuen Sze Man

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action / Pre Trial (application to Amend Pleadings, Trial Listed 17 April 2023)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to amend an amended defence and counterclaim should be granted when application is made shortly before trial
  2. 2 Adequacy of explanation for lateness in seeking amendment
  3. 3 Whether the proposed amendment is technical or changes scope of pleaded case

Ratio Decidendi

Granting leave was refused because the application was extremely late with no adequate explanation, the proposed amendments were substantive not merely technical and would cause serious prejudice to the plaintiffs by altering the pleaded case and disrupting imminent trial preparation; accordingly the balance favoured refusing amendment and ordering indemnity costs of HKD 45,000.

Court Disposition

Application to amend refused; defendants ordered to pay plaintiffs' costs on an indemnity basis, summarily assessed at HKD 45,000, payable by 14 April 2023; no further interlocutory applications without prior leave of the trial judge.

Orders

  • Leave to amend the amended defence and counterclaim refused
  • Defendants to pay plaintiffs' costs of the amendment application on an indemnity basis, summarily assessed at HKD 45,000