LOKE MEI YUK, MIMI v. THE HONGKONG AND SHANGHAI BANKING CORPORATION LTD AND ANOTHER

LOKE MEI YUK, MIMI v. THE HONGKONG AND SHANGHAI BANKING CORPORATION LTD AND ANOTHER

The summons was properly dismissed because the plaintiff's substantive claim had already been struck out and the summons constituted an improper procedural device to seek directions or summary judgment; the letters were correspondence not interrogatories, and therefore Master Levy's dismissal was upheld and the appeal dismissed with costs.

Citation
LOKE MEI YUK, MIMI v. THE HONGKONG AND SHANGHAI BANKING CORPORATION LTD AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Madam Loke; Defendant/respondent: 1st Defendant; 2nd Defendant: Ms WONG Yin
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
21 January 2008
Case Number
HCA1819/2006
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal Concerning Summary Judgment and Striking Out / Appeal From Master's Decision Dismissing Summons (heard in High Court Before Judge of the Court of First Instance)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Order 14 RHC, Order 2 R.2 RHC, Summary Judgment, Striking Out Statement of Claim, Restrictive Proceedings Order
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Appeal Summary Judgment Strike Out Restrictive Proceedings Order 14 RHC Order 2 R.2 RHC Striking Out Statement of Claim +1 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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Madam Loke

Plaintiff/appellant

1st Defendant

Defendant/respondent

Ms WONG Yin

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal Concerning Summary Judgment and Striking Out / Appeal From Master's Decision Dismissing Summons (heard in High Court Before Judge of the Court of First Instance)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff could obtain summary judgment under Order 14 when her claim had already been struck out
  2. 2 Whether the letters from the 1st defendant constituted interrogatories subject to withdrawal
  3. 3 Whether the summons was an improper procedural device to obtain directions after striking out

Ratio Decidendi

The summons was properly dismissed because the plaintiff's substantive claim had already been struck out and the summons constituted an improper procedural device to seek directions or summary judgment; the letters were correspondence not interrogatories, and therefore Master Levy's dismissal was upheld and the appeal dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs to the 1st defendant
  • Restrictive Proceedings Order made against the plaintiff