CHEUNG SUI KAN v. BOOKBACK LTD AND OTHERS

CHEUNG SUI KAN v. BOOKBACK LTD AND OTHERS

The court refused leave to appeal and all stay and relief applications because the challenges were not arguable, applicants failed to particularise fresh evidence or show inability to pay, and payment conditions were justified to prevent abuse while applicants remained in possession of valuable properties; the court maintained the interim stay of the writ of possession and awarded indemnity costs on summary assessment.

Citation
[2023] HKCFI 3179
Parties
Plaintiff (hcmp 1598/2022): Cheung Sui Kan; 1st Defendant (hcmp 1598/2022); Plaintiff (hca 1551/2023): Bookback Limited; 2nd Defendant (hcmp 1598/2022): Marilyn Helen Spiegel; 3rd Defendant (hcmp 1598/2022): All Occupiers of Lot No. 248 (Dragonara); Plaintiff (hcmp 2078/2022): Right Honour Group Limited; Defendant (hcmp 2078/2022): Urban Entertainment Limited trading as TIKITIKI BOWLING BAR; 1st Plaintiff (hca 1551/2023): Albury Garden Investments Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
28 November 2023
Case Number
HCMP1598/2022
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Civil Proceedings: Possession Claims Under Order 113, Consolidation Applications, Leave to Appeal and Stays / Interlocutory — Determination of Leave to Appeal, Stay Applications, Relief From Sanction and Costs Assessment
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused; stay applications refused; relief from sanction refused; interim stay of writ of possession maintained; indemnity costs awarded to respondents on summary assessment.
Legal Topics
Order 113 Rules of the High Court, Possession Proceedings, Consolidation of Actions, Stay of Execution, Leave to Appeal (costs Orders), Summary Assessment of Costs, Relief From Sanction
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Property Law Injunctions Costs Law Trusts and Equity Order 113 Rules of the High Court Possession Proceedings Consolidation of Actions +4 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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cheung Sui Kan

Plaintiff (hcmp 1598/2022)

Bookback Limited

1st Defendant (hcmp 1598/2022); Plaintiff (hca 1551/2023)

Marilyn Helen Spiegel

2nd Defendant (hcmp 1598/2022)

All Occupiers of Lot No. 248 (Dragonara)

3rd Defendant (hcmp 1598/2022)

Right Honour Group Limited

Plaintiff (hcmp 2078/2022)

Urban Entertainment Limited trading as TIKITIKI BOWLING BAR

Defendant (hcmp 2078/2022)

Albury Garden Investments Limited

1st Plaintiff (hca 1551/2023)

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Civil Proceedings: Possession Claims Under Order 113, Consolidation Applications, Leave to Appeal and Stays / Interlocutory — Determination of Leave to Appeal, Stay Applications, Relief From Sanction and Costs Assessment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted against costs and payment-condition orders
  2. 2 Whether payment conditions for pursuit of consolidation summons were justified
  3. 3 Whether stays of execution of costs orders and of writ of possession should be granted

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused leave to appeal and all stay and relief applications because the challenges were not arguable, applicants failed to particularise fresh evidence or show inability to pay, and payment conditions were justified to prevent abuse while applicants remained in possession of valuable properties; the court maintained the interim stay of the writ of possession and awarded indemnity costs on summary assessment.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused; stay applications refused; relief from sanction refused; interim stay of writ of possession maintained; indemnity costs awarded to respondents on summary assessment.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal refused (both Spiegel and Urban Entertainment)
  • Stay applications refused (both applicants)