DENNIS KWOK HON MING v. POON SUI CHEONG ALBERT AND OTHERS

DENNIS KWOK HON MING v. POON SUI CHEONG ALBERT AND OTHERS

Decisions that finalise or form part of the Main Judgment do not require leave to appeal; interlocutory directions relating to a future valuation process (allocation of valuation costs and appointment/identity of valuers) are interlocutory and require leave to appeal; leave was refused on the merits for the proposed appeals from the March Decision and where leave was required it was not granted; applications for a stay of execution of the buy‑out order were dismissed because the appeal lacked sufficient strength to render the buy‑out order unsafe and the respondent could be protected and was not shown to be unable to repay.

Citation
DENNIS KWOK HON MING v. POON SUI CHEONG ALBERT AND OTHERS
Parties
Petitioner: Dennis Kwok Hon Ming; 1st Respondent: Poon Sui Cheong Albert; 2nd Respondent: Irene Tseng; 3rd Respondent: Yang Hong Ching Norris; 4th Respondent: Luo Ming Xin William; 5th Respondent: Law Wing Mei Helen; 6th Respondent: Asian Adventure Limited; 7th Respondent: Enchantment Properties Limited; 8th Respondent: China Funds Development Limited; 9th Respondent: Minloy Limited; 9th Respondent: Top Master Development Limited; 9th Respondent: Wealth Island International Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
6 April 2017
Case Number
HCMP1526/2013
Procedural Posture
Unfair Prejudice Petitions Under S168 a Companies Ordinance; Applications for Leave to Appeal and Stay of Execution / Chamber Decision on Summons for Leave to Appeal and Stay of Execution Following Trial and Subsequent Directions Hearings
Legal Topics
Unfair Prejudice, Buy Out Order, Leave to Appeal, Stay of Execution, Valuation of Shares, Costs of Valuation
Source Language
EN
Company Law Civil Procedure Appeal Procedure Costs Law Valuation Disputes Unfair Prejudice Buy Out Order Leave to Appeal +3 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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dennis Kwok Hon Ming

Petitioner

Poon Sui Cheong Albert

1st Respondent

Irene Tseng

2nd Respondent

Yang Hong Ching Norris

3rd Respondent

Luo Ming Xin William

4th Respondent

Law Wing Mei Helen

5th Respondent

Asian Adventure Limited

6th Respondent

Enchantment Properties Limited

7th Respondent

China Funds Development Limited

8th Respondent

Minloy Limited

9th Respondent

Top Master Development Limited

9th Respondent

Wealth Island International Limited

9th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Unfair Prejudice Petitions Under S168 a Companies Ordinance; Applications for Leave to Appeal and Stay of Execution / Chamber Decision on Summons for Leave to Appeal and Stay of Execution Following Trial and Subsequent Directions Hearings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal was required for decisions finalizing orders following the Main Judgment
  2. 2 Whether orders relating to costs of a future valuation and appointment of valuers are interlocutory and require leave to appeal
  3. 3 Whether leave to appeal should be granted on the merits

Ratio Decidendi

Decisions that finalise or form part of the Main Judgment do not require leave to appeal; interlocutory directions relating to a future valuation process (allocation of valuation costs and appointment/identity of valuers) are interlocutory and require leave to appeal; leave was refused on the merits for the proposed appeals from the March Decision and where leave was required it was not granted; applications for a stay of execution of the buy‑out order were dismissed because the appeal lacked sufficient strength to render the buy‑out order unsafe and the respondent could be protected and was not shown to be unable to repay.