ANTHONY JAMES HATTON v. DOROTHY JANE FURNESS AND OTHERS
The court declined to vary the order nisi and held that, on the basis that the strike-out applications were argued on the same legal grounds and that the respondents succeeded overall, a global order awarding the respondents half of the costs of the striking-out applications is appropriate; the petitioners' arguments about relative value of dormant companies did not alter the costs exercise.
- Citation
- ANTHONY JAMES HATTON v. DOROTHY JANE FURNESS AND OTHERS
- Parties
- Petitioner: Anthony James Hatton; Petitioner: Yearich Limited; Petitioner: Rustem Limited; 1st Respondent: Dorothy Jane Furness; 2nd Respondent: Raphael Homer Echaluce; 3rd Respondent: Stephen Smout; 4th Respondent / 1st Plaintiff: Step By Step Limited; 4th Respondent / 3rd Plaintiff: Step Up Limited; 4th Respondent: Step Further Limited; 4th Respondent: Glory Sun Investments Limited; 4th Respondent: Step Onward Limited; 4th Respondent / 2nd Plaintiff: New Success Enterprises Limited; 5th Respondent: Insomnia Live Music Pte Limited; 4th Respondent: Low Soke Leng Cindy; 4th Respondent: Rich Sun International Limited; 4th Respondent: New Sun Development Limited; 4th Respondent: Harbour Sun Limited; 4th Respondent: Gain Sun International Limited; 4th Respondent: Excel Sun Limited; 4th Respondent: Step Higher Limited; 4th Respondent: Sparkling Wine International Limited; 1st Respondent: Mostop Limited; 3rd Respondent: Craigside Company Limited; 3rd Defendant: Entertain Company Limited; 4th Defendant: Mad Dogs Wanchai Public House Limited
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Jurisdiction
- Hong Kong
- Judgment Date
- 21 December 2007
- Case Number
- HCMP838/2007
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Company Petitions Under the Companies Ordinance, Cap. 32 (strike Out and Costs Applications) / Decision on Application to Vary Costs Order Nisi Following Consolidated Strike Out Applications (hearing and Decision 21 December 2007)
- Outcome
- Application to vary the order nisi as to costs refused; order nisi maintained and costs of today's applications awarded to the respondents.
- Legal Topics
- Unfair Prejudice Petitions, Strike Out Applications, Costs Orders, Consolidation of Hearings
- Source Language
- EN
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Anthony James Hatton
Petitioner
Yearich Limited
Petitioner
Rustem Limited
Petitioner
Dorothy Jane Furness
1st Respondent
Raphael Homer Echaluce
2nd Respondent
Stephen Smout
3rd Respondent
Step By Step Limited
4th Respondent / 1st Plaintiff
Step Up Limited
4th Respondent / 3rd Plaintiff
Step Further Limited
4th Respondent
Glory Sun Investments Limited
4th Respondent
Step Onward Limited
4th Respondent
New Success Enterprises Limited
4th Respondent / 2nd Plaintiff
Insomnia Live Music Pte Limited
5th Respondent
Low Soke Leng Cindy
4th Respondent
Rich Sun International Limited
4th Respondent
New Sun Development Limited
4th Respondent
Harbour Sun Limited
4th Respondent
Gain Sun International Limited
4th Respondent
Excel Sun Limited
4th Respondent
Step Higher Limited
4th Respondent
Sparkling Wine International Limited
4th Respondent
Mostop Limited
1st Respondent
Craigside Company Limited
3rd Respondent
Entertain Company Limited
3rd Defendant
Mad Dogs Wanchai Public House Limited
4th Defendant
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Company Petitions Under the Companies Ordinance, Cap. 32 (strike Out and Costs Applications) / Decision on Application to Vary Costs Order Nisi Following Consolidated Strike Out Applications (hearing and Decision 21 December 2007)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the petitioners were the successful party for costs purposes
- 2 Whether the relative commercial value of dormant/shelf companies affects costs allocation
- 3 Whether the respondents' strike-out applications were arguable for each petition
Ratio Decidendi
The court declined to vary the order nisi and held that, on the basis that the strike-out applications were argued on the same legal grounds and that the respondents succeeded overall, a global order awarding the respondents half of the costs of the striking-out applications is appropriate; the petitioners' arguments about relative value of dormant companies did not alter the costs exercise.
Court Disposition
Application to vary the order nisi as to costs refused; order nisi maintained and costs of today's applications awarded to the respondents.
Orders
- Order nisi upheld: petitioners to pay half of the costs incurred in all the striking-out applications to the respondents, to be paid forthwith by the petitioners.
- Costs of the application to vary the order nisi (today's applications) awarded to the respondents.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment