CHOW HOW YEEN MARGARET AND OTHERS v. WEX PHARMACEUTICALS INC AND ANOTHER

CHOW HOW YEEN MARGARET AND OTHERS v. WEX PHARMACEUTICALS INC AND ANOTHER

It is not plain and obvious that the plaintiffs could with reasonable diligence have discovered the fraud before 2010/2011 because the defendants' public announcements in 2005 were misleading and tended to conceal earlier Beijing court decisions; factual issues remain to be tried on s.26 and the defendants failed to show no possibility the extension could succeed; ordering a preliminary issue would be premature and not plainly advantageous, therefore the 2nd defendant's summons to strike out or order a preliminary issue is dismissed.

Citation
CHOW HOW YEEN MARGARET AND OTHERS v. WEX PHARMACEUTICALS INC AND ANOTHER
Parties
1st Plaintiff: CHOW HOW YEEN MARGARET; 2nd Plaintiff: GAO CHENG (XIE LI) COMPANY LIMITED; 3rd Plaintiff: MUSCULAR INVESTMENT COMPANY LIMITED; 1st Defendant: WEX PHARMACEUTICALS INC.; 2nd Defendant: WEX MEDICAL LIMITED
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
18 September 2013
Case Number
HCA537/2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Action for Fraudulent Misrepresentation and Damages; Strike Out Application on Limitation Grounds / Chambers Hearing on Summons to Strike Out and Alternative Application for Preliminary Issue (limitation)
Outcome
2nd defendant's summons dismissed
Legal Topics
Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Deliberate Concealment, Limitation Ordinance S.26, Strike Out Applications, Preliminary Issue for Limitation
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Tort (fraud/misrepresentation) Limitation Law Contract Law Company Law Fraudulent Misrepresentation Deliberate Concealment Limitation Ordinance S.26 +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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CHOW HOW YEEN MARGARET

1st Plaintiff

GAO CHENG (XIE LI) COMPANY LIMITED

2nd Plaintiff

MUSCULAR INVESTMENT COMPANY LIMITED

3rd Plaintiff

WEX PHARMACEUTICALS INC.

1st Defendant

WEX MEDICAL LIMITED

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action for Fraudulent Misrepresentation and Damages; Strike Out Application on Limitation Grounds / Chambers Hearing on Summons to Strike Out and Alternative Application for Preliminary Issue (limitation)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs' misrepresentation claims are time-barred by the ordinary six year limitation period
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to the s.26 extension of limitation for fraud or deliberate concealment
  3. 3 Whether it is plain and obvious that the plaintiffs could, with reasonable diligence, have discovered the fraud before 2010/2011

Ratio Decidendi

It is not plain and obvious that the plaintiffs could with reasonable diligence have discovered the fraud before 2010/2011 because the defendants' public announcements in 2005 were misleading and tended to conceal earlier Beijing court decisions; factual issues remain to be tried on s.26 and the defendants failed to show no possibility the extension could succeed; ordering a preliminary issue would be premature and not plainly advantageous, therefore the 2nd defendant's summons to strike out or order a preliminary issue is dismissed.

Court Disposition

2nd defendant's summons dismissed

Orders

  • Summons of the 2nd defendant dismissed