CHEUNG SHUK MEI v. POON KIN FAI AND ANOTHER

CHEUNG SHUK MEI v. POON KIN FAI AND ANOTHER

The Court refused leave because the decision under challenge was a case management decision not plainly wrong; the judge had validly concluded the respondents' list of documents was inadequate and ordered further and better discovery; the respondents' grounds were either matters for trial or otherwise lacked merit; leave was refused and costs awarded to the petitioner on an indemnity basis to deter satellite litigation.

Citation
CHEUNG SHUK MEI v. POON KIN FAI AND ANOTHER
Parties
Petitioner: Cheung Shuk Mei; 1st Respondent: Poon Kin Fai; 2nd Respondent: Sun Hing Cheong Textile Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
4 September 2014
Case Number
HCMP1705/2014
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Proceedings (application for Leave to Appeal From Discovery/case Management Order) / Application for Leave to Appeal and Stay; Leave Refused by Court of Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused; application for reconsideration at an oral hearing barred; respondents ordered to pay petitioner\'s costs on indemnity basis fixed at HK$64,183.31; respondents required to comply with judge\'s order to file a further and better list of documents
Legal Topics
Discovery, Leave to Appeal, Case Management, Costs, Stay, Further and Better List of Documents, Indemnity Costs
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Company Law Discovery Leave to Appeal Case Management Costs Stay Further and Better List of Documents +1 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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cheung Shuk Mei

Petitioner

Poon Kin Fai

1st Respondent

Sun Hing Cheong Textile Limited

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Proceedings (application for Leave to Appeal From Discovery/case Management Order) / Application for Leave to Appeal and Stay; Leave Refused by Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted against a case management order
  2. 2 Whether the respondents' list of documents was adequate and whether further and better discovery should be ordered
  3. 3 Whether the complaint of mismanagement is bad in law at this interlocutory stage

Ratio Decidendi

The Court refused leave because the decision under challenge was a case management decision not plainly wrong; the judge had validly concluded the respondents' list of documents was inadequate and ordered further and better discovery; the respondents' grounds were either matters for trial or otherwise lacked merit; leave was refused and costs awarded to the petitioner on an indemnity basis to deter satellite litigation.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused; application for reconsideration at an oral hearing barred; respondents ordered to pay petitioner\'s costs on indemnity basis fixed at HK$64,183.31; respondents required to comply with judge\'s order to file a further and better list of documents

Orders

  • Leave to appeal refused
  • No party may request this determination to be reconsidered at an oral hearing inter partes pursuant to Order 59 rule 2A(8) of the Rules of the High Court