TANG WAI YEE, SYLVIA v. HE SHIMENG AND ANOTHER

TANG WAI YEE, SYLVIA v. HE SHIMENG AND ANOTHER

The application for a stay was dismissed because the applicant failed to demonstrate any reasonable prospect of success on appeal and sought to circumvent prior refusals by using the bankruptcy/statutory demand proceedings, constituting an abuse of process; therefore no stay under Order 59, rule 13(1) was justified.

Citation
TANG WAI YEE, SYLVIA v. HE SHIMENG AND ANOTHER
Parties
Applicant (judgment Debtor): TANG WAI YEE, SYLVIA; 1st Respondent (1st Judgment Creditor): HE SHIMENG; 2nd Respondent (2nd Judgment Creditor): LIN LINA FANG
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
11 April 2003
Case Number
HCSD24/2002
Procedural Posture
Application to Set Aside Statutory Demand / Application for Stay of Execution Following Dismissal of Set Aside Application
Outcome
Application for stay of the order dated 27 March 2003 dismissed
Legal Topics
Statutory Demand, Stay of Execution, Abuse of Process, Default Judgment, Reasonable Prospect of Success on Appeal
Source Language
EN
Insolvency Bankruptcy Civil Procedure Appeal Statutory Demand Stay of Execution Abuse of Process Default Judgment +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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

TANG WAI YEE, SYLVIA

Applicant (judgment Debtor)

HE SHIMENG

1st Respondent (1st Judgment Creditor)

LIN LINA FANG

2nd Respondent (2nd Judgment Creditor)

Procedural Posture

Application to Set Aside Statutory Demand / Application for Stay of Execution Following Dismissal of Set Aside Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a stay of execution of the order of 27 March 2003 and the underlying judgment should be granted
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has a reasonable prospect of success on appeal
  3. 3 Whether the applicant's conduct constitutes an abuse of the process of the court

Ratio Decidendi

The application for a stay was dismissed because the applicant failed to demonstrate any reasonable prospect of success on appeal and sought to circumvent prior refusals by using the bankruptcy/statutory demand proceedings, constituting an abuse of process; therefore no stay under Order 59, rule 13(1) was justified.

Court Disposition

Application for stay of the order dated 27 March 2003 dismissed

Orders

  • Application for stay of the order of 27 March 2003 dismissed
  • Costs to the respondents awarded; to be taxed if not agreed