FOO KWONG (CUTLERY) METAL WORKS LTD v. FAN MAN (OR MING) KWONG

FOO KWONG (CUTLERY) METAL WORKS LTD v. FAN MAN (OR MING) KWONG

The defence advanced by the appellant was more than flimsy and raised arguable points (possible extinguishment by the 1966 agreement and valid limitation defence because the 1968 confirmation may not amount to an acknowledgement); accordingly the Assistant Registrar's imposition of the condition to lodge the full sum was unnecessary and the appellant should be allowed to defend unconditionally.

Citation
FOO KWONG (CUTLERY) METAL WORKS LTD v. FAN MAN (OR MING) KWONG
Parties
Plaintiff (respondent): Foo Kwong (Cutlery) Metal Works Limited; Defendant (appellant): Fan Man (or Ming) Kwong (a male)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
11 June 1973
Case Number
HCA3009/1972
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From Interlocutory Decision (order 14 Application) / Appeal From Assistant Registrar's Decision Permitting Defence Subject to Condition; Hearing in Chambers
Outcome
Appeal allowed to the extent that the defendant may defend without conditions; periods fixed by the Assistant Registrar to be adjusted for date of decision; costs awarded to appellant and counsel certified.
Legal Topics
Order 14 Summary Judgment, Account Stated, Statute of Limitations, Acknowledgement of Debt, Equitable Estoppel
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Contract Law Limitation Law Equity (estoppel) Order 14 Summary Judgment Account Stated Statute of Limitations Acknowledgement of Debt +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 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Foo Kwong (Cutlery) Metal Works Limited

Plaintiff (respondent)

Fan Man (or Ming) Kwong (a male)

Defendant (appellant)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From Interlocutory Decision (order 14 Application) / Appeal From Assistant Registrar's Decision Permitting Defence Subject to Condition; Hearing in Chambers

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant's proposed defence is arguable so as to defeat final judgment under Order 14
  2. 2 Whether an agreement dated 16 September 1966 extinguished the alleged debt and produces an estoppel against the plaintiff
  3. 3 Whether the defendant's confirmation endorsed on the auditors' letter of 28 November 1968 constituted an acknowledgement sufficient to defeat the Limitation Ordinance

Ratio Decidendi

The defence advanced by the appellant was more than flimsy and raised arguable points (possible extinguishment by the 1966 agreement and valid limitation defence because the 1968 confirmation may not amount to an acknowledgement); accordingly the Assistant Registrar's imposition of the condition to lodge the full sum was unnecessary and the appellant should be allowed to defend unconditionally.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed to the extent that the defendant may defend without conditions; periods fixed by the Assistant Registrar to be adjusted for date of decision; costs awarded to appellant and counsel certified.

Orders

  • No conditions attached to defendant's permission to defend
  • Periods of time fixed by the Assistant Registrar to apply with necessary allowance for the date of this decision