RIGHT HONOUR GROUP LTD v. URBAN ENTERTAINMENT LTD t/a TIKITIKI BOWLING BAR

RIGHT HONOUR GROUP LTD v. URBAN ENTERTAINMENT LTD t/a TIKITIKI BOWLING BAR

The court refused leave to appeal and all related stay and relief applications because the intended appeals attacked only interlocutory costs orders and were not arguable on the merits; the imposition of payment conditions was justified by the lateness and lack of particularised evidence in the consolidation applications and to prevent tactical delay by parties in possession of valuable properties; summary assessment on an indemnity basis was appropriate and the WP Interim Stay was maintained.

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
HCMP2078/2022
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Consolidated Possession and Related Applications (order 113 Proceedings; Applications for Consolidation, Stays, Leave to Appeal and Costs) / Hearing of Summonses for Leave to Appeal, Stay Applications, Relief From Sanction and Costs Assessment; Directions Given
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused; stay applications refused; relief from sanction refused; WP Interim Stay maintained; summary assessment of costs made and indemnity costs awarded.
Legal Topics
Order 113 Rules of the High Court Cap 4 a, Possession and Writs of Possession, Consolidation of Actions, Summary Assessment of Costs, Payment Condition as Sanction, Stay Pending Appeal, Relief From Sanction, Injunctions Against Bailiffs
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Property Law Costs Law Equitable Relief/injunctions Appeal Procedure Order 113 Rules of the High Court Cap 4 a Possession and Writs of Possession Consolidation of Actions +5 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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
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 Consolidated Possession and Related Applications (order 113 Proceedings; Applications for Consolidation, Stays, Leave to Appeal and Costs) / Hearing of Summonses for Leave to Appeal, Stay Applications, Relief From Sanction and Costs Assessment; Directions Given

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted against interlocutory costs orders
  2. 2 Whether stays of execution of payment conditions and of possession writ should be granted
  3. 3 Whether relief from sanction or extension of time for payment should be granted

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused leave to appeal and all related stay and relief applications because the intended appeals attacked only interlocutory costs orders and were not arguable on the merits; the imposition of payment conditions was justified by the lateness and lack of particularised evidence in the consolidation applications and to prevent tactical delay by parties in possession of valuable properties; summary assessment on an indemnity basis was appropriate and the WP Interim Stay was maintained.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused; stay applications refused; relief from sanction refused; WP Interim Stay maintained; summary assessment of costs made and indemnity costs awarded.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal (Leave Applications) by Spiegel and Urban Entertainment refused
  • Stay Applications pending leave refused