TANG CHAI ON AND ANOTHER v. TANG SING KI AND ANOTHER

TANG CHAI ON AND ANOTHER v. TANG SING KI AND ANOTHER

Extension of time refused because the asserted reason for delay (solicitors withholding documents) was not persuasive as the documents could be obtained from court files, most grounds were unpleaded and lacked evidence or reasonable prospect of success, the contested use of the January 2013 letter was justified by...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
TANG CHAI ON AND ANOTHER v. TANG SING KI AND ANOTHER
Parties
1st Plaintiff: TANG CHAI ON; 2nd Plaintiff: TANG CHAK MING; 1st Defendant: TANG SING KI; 2nd Defendant: TANG CHAK MO
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
6 April 2016
Case Number
HCA207/2013
Procedural Posture
Post Judgment Applications for Extension of Time to Appeal and Stay of Execution Following a High Court Judgment / Application to Extend Time to File and Serve Notice of Appeal and Application for Stay of Execution (post Judgment)
Outcome
Both the time extension application and the stay of execution application refused; application to admit fresh affirmations refused; costs order nisi in favour of plaintiffs (elder brothers) with summary assessment directions.
Legal Topics
Extension of Time to Appeal, Stay of Execution, Fresh Evidence on Appeal, Pleading and Adducing Evidence, Running Account and Limitation, Partition
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Appeal Equity Partnership Law Property Law Costs Extension of Time to Appeal Stay of Execution +4 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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

TANG CHAI ON

1st Plaintiff

TANG CHAK MING

2nd Plaintiff

TANG SING KI

1st Defendant

TANG CHAK MO

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Post Judgment Applications for Extension of Time to Appeal and Stay of Execution Following a High Court Judgment / Application to Extend Time to File and Serve Notice of Appeal and Application for Stay of Execution (post Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to extend time to file and serve a notice of appeal
  2. 2 Whether the proposed grounds of appeal have a reasonable prospect of success
  3. 3 Whether a stay of execution should be granted pending appeal

Ratio Decidendi

Extension of time refused because the asserted reason for delay (solicitors withholding documents) was not persuasive as the documents could be obtained from court files, most grounds were unpleaded and lacked evidence or reasonable prospect of success, the contested use of the January 2013 letter was justified by its relevance to pleaded issues, the limitation point lacked substance as the accounts were running accounts, and fresh evidence failed the first Ladd v Marshall criterion; accordingly no appeal was viable and stay of execution was refused.

Court Disposition

Both the time extension application and the stay of execution application refused; application to admit fresh affirmations refused; costs order nisi in favour of plaintiffs (elder brothers) with summary assessment directions.

Orders

  • Time extension application refused
  • Stay of execution application refused