WELLSINO LTD v. ELLA HOLDING COMPANY LTD

WELLSINO LTD v. ELLA HOLDING COMPANY LTD

The application for default judgment was dismissed because service on the 2nd defendant could not be shown to be reliably effected due to an address discrepancy in the certificate of posting, and independently the pleaded claim against the 2nd defendant was founded on an oral agreement which did not meet the statutory writing requirement under s.3 of the Conveyancing and Property Ordinance (no signed memorandum/receipt alleged), so default judgment could not properly be given.

Citation
WELLSINO LTD v. ELLA HOLDING COMPANY LTD
Parties
Plaintiff (original Action); 1st Defendant (counterclaim): Wellsino Limited (永崇有限公司); Defendant (original Action); Plaintiff (counterclaim): Ella Holding Company Limited (恩娜控股有限公司); 2nd Defendant (counterclaim); Manager of Li Sz Shing Tso: Li Wah Kwong Rex (李華光); Registered Owner / Subject of Dispute: Li Sz Shing Tso (李四勝祖)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
30 April 2014
Case Number
HCA1903/2013
Procedural Posture
Original Action With Counterclaim (civil) / Application for Default Judgment (inter Partes Summons) Decision on Summons
Outcome
Application for default judgment dismissed; summons dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Conveyancing, Default Judgment, Service of Process, Specific Performance, Statute of Frauds / Writing Requirement, Limitation and Laches
Source Language
EN
Property Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Equity Conveyancing Default Judgment Service of Process Specific Performance +2 more

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wellsino Limited (永崇有限公司)

Plaintiff (original Action); 1st Defendant (counterclaim)

Ella Holding Company Limited (恩娜控股有限公司)

Defendant (original Action); Plaintiff (counterclaim)

Li Wah Kwong Rex (李華光)

2nd Defendant (counterclaim); Manager of Li Sz Shing Tso

Li Sz Shing Tso (李四勝祖)

Registered Owner / Subject of Dispute

Procedural Posture

Original Action With Counterclaim (civil) / Application for Default Judgment (inter Partes Summons) Decision on Summons

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inter Partes Summons was validly served on the 2nd defendant
  2. 2 Whether an oral agreement for the sale of land can found relief given s.3 of the Conveyancing and Property Ordinance
  3. 3 Whether facts alleged suffice for default judgment against the manager of the registered owner

Ratio Decidendi

The application for default judgment was dismissed because service on the 2nd defendant could not be shown to be reliably effected due to an address discrepancy in the certificate of posting, and independently the pleaded claim against the 2nd defendant was founded on an oral agreement which did not meet the statutory writing requirement under s.3 of the Conveyancing and Property Ordinance (no signed memorandum/receipt alleged), so default judgment could not properly be given.

Court Disposition

Application for default judgment dismissed; summons dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Summons dismissed with costs
  • No default judgment granted against the 2nd defendant