WONG YAU KWAN AND OTHERS v. ZHANG HONGJIE AND OTHERS

WONG YAU KWAN AND OTHERS v. ZHANG HONGJIE AND OTHERS

The striking out application was self-contained so costs should be decided now; accordingly the 1st respondent must pay the petitioners' costs of the application forthwith (to be taxed if not agreed). The 2nd respondent had no good reason to participate and support the application; therefore costs it incurred in...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
WONG YAU KWAN AND OTHERS v. ZHANG HONGJIE AND OTHERS
Parties
1st Petitioner: WONG YAU KWAN; 2nd Petitioner: CHONG YUK YUEN; 3rd Petitioner: WONG MING KWAN; 1st Respondent: ZHANG HONGJIE; 2nd Respondent: UNITED TECHNOLOGY HOLDINGS COMPANY LIMITED; 3rd Respondent: CHANG YAN INTERNATIONAL COPPER INDUSTRY LIMITED
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
19 May 2010
Case Number
HCCW574/2009
Procedural Posture
Companies Winding Up Proceedings (winding Up Petition Under Companies Ordinance) / Decision on Costs Following Striking Out Application
Outcome
Application to strike out dismissed (as per earlier decision dated 13 April 2010); decision on costs as set out in orders.
Legal Topics
Striking Out Application, Costs of Interlocutory Applications, Participation of Nominal Company Party, Section 168 a and Section 177(1)(f) Companies Ordinance
Source Language
en
Company Law Insolvency Civil Procedure Costs Striking Out Application Costs of Interlocutory Applications Participation of Nominal Company Party Section 168 a and Section 177(1)(f) Companies Ordinance

Source-derived case record

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 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

WONG YAU KWAN

1st Petitioner

CHONG YUK YUEN

2nd Petitioner

WONG MING KWAN

3rd Petitioner

ZHANG HONGJIE

1st Respondent

UNITED TECHNOLOGY HOLDINGS COMPANY LIMITED

2nd Respondent

CHANG YAN INTERNATIONAL COPPER INDUSTRY LIMITED

3rd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Companies Winding Up Proceedings (winding Up Petition Under Companies Ordinance) / Decision on Costs Following Striking Out Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether costs of the striking out application should be reserved until trial
  2. 2 Whether the 1st respondent should be ordered to pay the petitioners' costs of the striking out application forthwith
  3. 3 Whether the 2nd respondent (company) should bear the costs it incurred in supporting the striking out application

Ratio Decidendi

The striking out application was self-contained so costs should be decided now; accordingly the 1st respondent must pay the petitioners' costs of the application forthwith (to be taxed if not agreed). The 2nd respondent had no good reason to participate and support the application; therefore costs it incurred in doing so should not be borne by the company, and no order is made against the 2nd respondent for the petitioners' costs.

Court Disposition

Application to strike out dismissed (as per earlier decision dated 13 April 2010); decision on costs as set out in orders.

Orders

  • 1st respondent ordered to pay the petitioners the costs of the striking out application including all costs reserved, to be paid forthwith and to be taxed if not agreed.
  • No order as to costs between the petitioners and the 2nd respondent (petitioners not seeking costs against the 2nd respondent).