WONG YEE CHUK AND ANOTHER v. LO PO WAI, HARRY AND OTHERS

WONG YEE CHUK AND ANOTHER v. LO PO WAI, HARRY AND OTHERS

Documents relating to the Mainland trademark application transfers (classes (b) and (g)) are discoverable; because the Petitioners failed to respond sufficiently to discovery requests the court ordered the 1st and 2nd Petitioners to produce the documents or confirm non-possession and control within seven days and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 3084
Parties
1st Petitioner: WONG YEE CHUK; 2nd Petitioner: CHENG WAI KING PAT; 1st Respondent: LO PO WAI HARRY; 2nd Respondent: PAN SHI LIANG; 3rd Respondent: HARSEN ENGINEERING LIMITED; 4th Respondent: HARSEN INDUSTRIES LIMITED; 5th Respondent: HARSEN (CHINA) LIMITED
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
8 October 2021
Case Number
HCMP3366/2016
Procedural Posture
Companies Ordinance Section 724(1) Petition / Summons for Discovery Under Order 24 Rules 10 & 11 a of the Rules of High Court
Outcome
Order made requiring 1st and 2nd Petitioners to produce or confirm non-possession of the specified trademark transfer documents within seven days; costs awarded to 2nd Respondent.
Legal Topics
Discovery, Costs, Trademark Transfer Documents, Compliance With Procedural Rules
Source Language
en
Company Law Civil Procedure Intellectual Property Discovery Costs Trademark Transfer Documents Compliance With Procedural Rules

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

WONG YEE CHUK

1st Petitioner

CHENG WAI KING PAT

2nd Petitioner

LO PO WAI HARRY

1st Respondent

PAN SHI LIANG

2nd Respondent

HARSEN ENGINEERING LIMITED

3rd Respondent

HARSEN INDUSTRIES LIMITED

4th Respondent

HARSEN (CHINA) LIMITED

5th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Companies Ordinance Section 724(1) Petition / Summons for Discovery Under Order 24 Rules 10 & 11 a of the Rules of High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether documents relating to Mainland trademark transfer applications (classes (b) and (g)) are discoverable
  2. 2 Whether Petitioners' failure to respond to O10 r10(2) notice justified court order
  3. 3 Whether an order for discovery should be refused under O24 r13 as unnecessary

Ratio Decidendi

Documents relating to the Mainland trademark application transfers (classes (b) and (g)) are discoverable; because the Petitioners failed to respond sufficiently to discovery requests the court ordered the 1st and 2nd Petitioners to produce the documents or confirm non-possession and control within seven days and awarded costs to the 2nd Respondent in the sum of HK$100,000.

Court Disposition

Order made requiring 1st and 2nd Petitioners to produce or confirm non-possession of the specified trademark transfer documents within seven days; costs awarded to 2nd Respondent.

Orders

  • 1st and 2nd Petitioners are to, within seven days, provide to the 2nd Respondent copies of the documents falling within classes (b) and (g) of the summons or confirm to the 2nd Respondent's solicitors that they do not have any such documents and state whether they remain within the Petitioners' control.
  • The Petitioners are ordered to pay the 2nd Respondent's costs of and occasioned by the summons dated 26 April 2021, summarily assessed at HK$100,000.