EASTERN HOPE LTD. v. STARLIGHT (INTERNATIONAL) ENTERPRISES LTD.

EASTERN HOPE LTD. v. STARLIGHT (INTERNATIONAL) ENTERPRISES LTD.

The court found on the material before it that there was credible testimony that the Plaintiff might be unable to pay the Defendant\'s costs, that the case\'s complexion had changed (abandonment of specific performance and confinement to damages) and that there was an imminent, commercially significant application to vacate the lis pendens; in the exercise of its unfettered discretion the court allowed the appeal, set aside the Master\'s order, and ordered the Plaintiff to furnish security of HK$550,000.

Citation
EASTERN HOPE LTD. v. STARLIGHT (INTERNATIONAL) ENTERPRISES LTD.
Parties
Plaintiff (respondent): Eastern Hope Limited; Defendant (applicant): Starlight (International) Enterprises Ltd.
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
16 January 1998
Case Number
HCA1294/1997
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (interlocutory) Security for Costs / Appeal in Chambers at Court of First Instance (interlocutory Application)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Master\'s order dated 16 September 1997 set aside; security for costs ordered.
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Lis Pendens, Specific Performance, Costs Certification, Vacating Lis Pendens
Source Language
EN
Company Law Civil Procedure Costs Property Law Land Registration Security for Costs Lis Pendens Specific Performance +2 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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Eastern Hope Limited

Plaintiff (respondent)

Starlight (International) Enterprises Ltd.

Defendant (applicant)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (interlocutory) Security for Costs / Appeal in Chambers at Court of First Instance (interlocutory Application)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the requirements of section 357 Companies Ordinance are met to order security for costs
  2. 2 Proper quantum of security for costs including imminent application to vacate lis pendens
  3. 3 Whether the matter justified certification for two Counsel

Ratio Decidendi

The court found on the material before it that there was credible testimony that the Plaintiff might be unable to pay the Defendant\'s costs, that the case\'s complexion had changed (abandonment of specific performance and confinement to damages) and that there was an imminent, commercially significant application to vacate the lis pendens; in the exercise of its unfettered discretion the court allowed the appeal, set aside the Master\'s order, and ordered the Plaintiff to furnish security of HK$550,000.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Master\'s order dated 16 September 1997 set aside; security for costs ordered.

Orders

  • Plaintiff to pay HK$550,000 into Court within 21 days of the date of the judgment
  • Costs of this appeal to the Defendant in any event, to be taxed if not agreed