CHEUNG POH CHOO v. CHIN LAN HONG AND OTHERS

CHEUNG POH CHOO v. CHIN LAN HONG AND OTHERS

The court held that to sustain a petition under s.168A the complained conduct must plainly be conduct in the affairs of the specific subject company; allegations solely concerning other companies that do not interact with or affect the subject company's affairs must be struck out as irrelevant and abusive. Consequently substantial identical material in the nine petitions that related only to other companies was struck out and the petitioner was ordered to file amended petitions limited to matters relevant to 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
HCMP4757/2002
Procedural Posture
Petitions Under Section 168 a Companies Ordinance (unfair Prejudice) / Application to Strike Out Parts of Petitions Under Order 18 Rule 19; Decision on Summons
Outcome
Court allowed the strike out application in part; struck out specified paragraphs and annexes in each of the nine petitions that did not relate to the affairs of the respective subject companies; ordered amended petitions and costs.
Legal Topics
Unfair Prejudice, Section 168 a Companies Ordinance, Strike Out/abuse of Process, Shareholder Rights Vs Company Acts, Inspection of Corporate Records
Source Language
EN
Company Law Civil Procedure Equity Unfair Prejudice Section 168 a Companies Ordinance Strike Out/abuse of Process Shareholder Rights Vs Company Acts Inspection of Corporate Records

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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
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 (unfair Prejudice) / Application to Strike Out Parts of Petitions Under Order 18 Rule 19; Decision on Summons

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether complaints pleaded in multiple near-identical petitions relate to the affairs of the subject company for the purposes of s.168A
  2. 2 Whether acts of family members or of other companies can be treated as conduct of the subject company
  3. 3 Whether allegations are frivolous, vexatious or disclose no reasonable cause of action and thus should be struck out

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that to sustain a petition under s.168A the complained conduct must plainly be conduct in the affairs of the specific subject company; allegations solely concerning other companies that do not interact with or affect the subject company's affairs must be struck out as irrelevant and abusive. Consequently substantial identical material in the nine petitions that related only to other companies was struck out and the petitioner was ordered to file amended petitions limited to matters relevant to each subject company.

Court Disposition

Court allowed the strike out application in part; struck out specified paragraphs and annexes in each of the nine petitions that did not relate to the affairs of the respective subject companies; ordered amended petitions and costs.

Orders

  • Struck out specified paragraphs and annexes in each of the nine petitions as detailed in the reasons (parts relating solely to other companies).
  • Petitioner to file and serve amended petitions reflecting the deletions within 21 days of this decision.