CHEUNG POH CHOO v. CHIN LAN HONG AND OTHERS

CHEUNG POH CHOO v. CHIN LAN HONG AND OTHERS

The court held that s168A relief requires conduct in the affairs of the company subject to the petition; allegations that plainly concern other companies and do not affect the subject company's affairs must be struck out. Accordingly many paragraphs and annexes in the nine nearly identical petitions that relate exclusively to other companies were struck out, leaving only material that can properly found s168A relief in respect of each subject company.

Citation
CHEUNG POH CHOO v. CHIN LAN HONG AND OTHERS
Parties
Petitioner: Cheung Poh Choo; 1st Respondent: Chin Lan Hong; 2nd Respondent: Cheung Kee Wee; 3rd Respondent: Cheung Lin Wee; 4th Respondent: Cheung Ying Wai; 5th Respondent: Ka Ka Realty Limited; 5th Respondent: Lipoyuen Properties Limited; 5th Respondent: Shinta Realty Limited; 5th Respondent: E. Tung Construction Company Limited; 5th Respondent: E. Fu Property Limited; 5th Respondent: Da Lee Kai Property Management Limited; 5th Respondent: Dapoly Properties Limited; 5th Respondent: E. Wah Construction Company Limited; 5th Respondent: Katong Realty Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
3 September 2003
Case Number
HCMP4751/2002
Procedural Posture
Petitions Under Section 168 a Companies Ordinance (unfairly Prejudicial Conduct) / Interlocutory Strike Out Application; Decision Handed Down
Outcome
Specified parts of each of the nine petitions struck out; petitioner ordered to file amended petitions; costs awarded against petitioner (order nisi)
Legal Topics
Unfairly Prejudicial Conduct, Section 168 a, Striking Out Under Order 18 R 19, Abuse of Process, Costs
Source Language
EN
Company Law Shareholder Remedies Civil Procedure Equity Unfairly Prejudicial Conduct Section 168 a Striking Out Under Order 18 R 19 Abuse of Process +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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cheung Poh Choo

Petitioner

Chin Lan Hong

1st Respondent

Cheung Kee Wee

2nd Respondent

Cheung Lin Wee

3rd Respondent

Cheung Ying Wai

4th Respondent

Ka Ka Realty Limited

5th Respondent

Lipoyuen Properties Limited

5th Respondent

Shinta Realty Limited

5th Respondent

E. Tung Construction Company Limited

5th Respondent

E. Fu Property Limited

5th Respondent

Da Lee Kai Property Management Limited

5th Respondent

Dapoly Properties Limited

5th Respondent

E. Wah Construction Company Limited

5th Respondent

Katong Realty Limited

5th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Petitions Under Section 168 a Companies Ordinance (unfairly Prejudicial Conduct) / Interlocutory Strike Out Application; Decision Handed Down

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether complaints must concern the affairs of the subject company
  2. 2 Whether acts of shareholders in personal capacity constitute conduct of the company
  3. 3 Whether conduct of related or family companies can be aggregated to found relief under s168A

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that s168A relief requires conduct in the affairs of the company subject to the petition; allegations that plainly concern other companies and do not affect the subject company's affairs must be struck out. Accordingly many paragraphs and annexes in the nine nearly identical petitions that relate exclusively to other companies were struck out, leaving only material that can properly found s168A relief in respect of each subject company.

Court Disposition

Specified parts of each of the nine petitions struck out; petitioner ordered to file amended petitions; costs awarded against petitioner (order nisi)

Orders

  • Struck out specified paragraphs and annexes in each HCMP as detailed in the judgment
  • Petitioner ordered to file and serve amended petition in each proceeding within 21 days of the decision