LEELOONG INVESTMENT CO LTD v. LAU KWONG & HUNG (a firm of solicitors)

LEELOONG INVESTMENT CO LTD v. LAU KWONG & HUNG (a firm of solicitors)

The court found that Lau Kwong & Hung did not have authority from Leeloong to file the Notice to Act and that the DHCJ Seagroatt Order could not be construed as conferring such authority or as enabling LKH to pursue a common law derivative action; accordingly the Notice to Act dated 11 May 2018 was set aside and costs were awarded to the applicant where appropriate.

Citation
[2018] HKCFI 2244
Parties
1st Plaintiff: Chen Ha Ping Hepburn (as executrix of the estate of Chen Tsing Kwan, deceased); 2nd Plaintiff: Leeloong Investment Co. Ltd; 3rd Plaintiff: Chen Ha Ping Hepburn; 4th Plaintiff: Chen Ting Hoi; 1st Defendant: Chen Ting San Daniel; Applicant (hcmp 868/2018): Leeloong Investment Company Limited; Respondent (hcmp 868/2018): Lau Kwong & Hung (a firm of solicitors)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
11 October 2018
Case Number
HCMP868/2018
Procedural Posture
High Court Action HCA 570/2014 and Interlocutory HCMP 868/2018 / Interlocutory Applications — Summonses Heard Together in Chambers
Outcome
Notice to Act dated 11 May 2018 filed by Lau Kwong & Hung set aside; costs awarded to the applicant Leeloong Investment Company Limited in respect of the application
Legal Topics
Notice to Act, Set Aside, Costs on Discontinuance, Authority to Act, Misjoinder, Strike Out
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Costs Solicitors' Authority Derivative Actions Practice and Procedure Notice to Act Set Aside Costs on Discontinuance +3 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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chen Ha Ping Hepburn (as executrix of the estate of Chen Tsing Kwan, deceased)

1st Plaintiff

Leeloong Investment Co. Ltd

2nd Plaintiff

Chen Ha Ping Hepburn

3rd Plaintiff

Chen Ting Hoi

4th Plaintiff

Chen Ting San Daniel

1st Defendant

Leeloong Investment Company Limited

Applicant (hcmp 868/2018)

Lau Kwong & Hung (a firm of solicitors)

Respondent (hcmp 868/2018)

Procedural Posture

High Court Action HCA 570/2014 and Interlocutory HCMP 868/2018 / Interlocutory Applications — Summonses Heard Together in Chambers

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Notice to Act dated 11 May 2018 filed by Lau Kwong & Hung should be set aside for lack of authority
  2. 2 Whether the DHCJ Seagroatt order construed as authorising Lau Kwong & Hung to act for Leeloong or to pursue a derivative action
  3. 3 Whether costs should follow the event on discontinuance and the effect of CPR 38.6

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that Lau Kwong & Hung did not have authority from Leeloong to file the Notice to Act and that the DHCJ Seagroatt Order could not be construed as conferring such authority or as enabling LKH to pursue a common law derivative action; accordingly the Notice to Act dated 11 May 2018 was set aside and costs were awarded to the applicant where appropriate.

Court Disposition

Notice to Act dated 11 May 2018 filed by Lau Kwong & Hung set aside; costs awarded to the applicant Leeloong Investment Company Limited in respect of the application

Orders

  • Notice to Act dated 11 May 2018 filed by Lau Kwong & Hung set aside
  • Applicant Leeloong Investment Company Limited awarded costs of the application