REPUBLIC HOLDINGS LTD AND ANOTHE v. PANG WAI KWONG AND ANOTHER

REPUBLIC HOLDINGS LTD AND ANOTHE v. PANG WAI KWONG AND ANOTHER

The application for default judgment was dismissed because the plaintiffs failed to plead the District Court's jurisdiction as required by Practice Direction 27 §4 and did not plead necessary facts (such as annual rent or ratable value of the property) to establish that the claim falls within ss 32–39 of the District Court Ordinance, making it impossible to grant the relief sought on the pleadings alone.

Citation
REPUBLIC HOLDINGS LTD AND ANOTHE v. PANG WAI KWONG AND ANOTHER
Parties
1st Plaintiff: REPUBLIC HOLDINGS LIMITED; 2nd Plaintiff: NG LAM MAN; 1st Defendant: PANG WAI KWONG; 2nd Defendant: KAN FUNG
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
5 September 2017
Case Number
DCCJ761/2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Action (application to Set Aside Disposition and for Default Judgment) / Application for Default Judgment Under Order 19 R 7 Heard in Chambers; Decision Delivered
Outcome
Plaintiffs' application dismissed
Legal Topics
Setting Aside Disposition as Fraudulent (cpo S60), Default Judgment, District Court Jurisdictional Limits, Practice Direction Compliance
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Property Law Conveyancing Debt Recovery Setting Aside Disposition as Fraudulent (cpo S60) Default Judgment District Court Jurisdictional Limits Practice Direction Compliance

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

REPUBLIC HOLDINGS LIMITED

1st Plaintiff

NG LAM MAN

2nd Plaintiff

PANG WAI KWONG

1st Defendant

KAN FUNG

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action (application to Set Aside Disposition and for Default Judgment) / Application for Default Judgment Under Order 19 R 7 Heard in Chambers; Decision Delivered

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court can grant default judgment on the pleadings absent a jurisdictional plea as required by Practice Direction 27 §4
  2. 2 Whether the deed of gift is a disposition voidable under s 60 of the Conveyancing and Property Ordinance
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiffs have pleaded facts (including annual rent/ratable value) establishing District Court jurisdiction

Ratio Decidendi

The application for default judgment was dismissed because the plaintiffs failed to plead the District Court's jurisdiction as required by Practice Direction 27 §4 and did not plead necessary facts (such as annual rent or ratable value of the property) to establish that the claim falls within ss 32–39 of the District Court Ordinance, making it impossible to grant the relief sought on the pleadings alone.

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs' application dismissed

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • No order as to costs.