SETO SHA LI v. LAI JIN TONG AND ANOTHER

SETO SHA LI v. LAI JIN TONG AND ANOTHER

Leave was granted because the court exercised its discretion in favor of VCF after concluding the applicant supplied valid reasons: the witness resides in Taiwan and pandemic quarantine requirements (total 35 days) would likely prevent physical attendance; concurrent civil and criminal proceedings in Taiwan during the quarantine risked loss of rights or penalties; prejudice to the other party was not shown to be serious given the timing of the application; thus VCF was necessary to ensure fair and efficient disposal of the proceedings.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 3561
Parties
Plaintiff (original Action); 2nd Defendant (counterclaim): Seto Sha Li; 1st Defendant (original Action); Plaintiff (counterclaim): Lai Jin Tong; 2nd Defendant (original Action): Lai Sin Han Isabel; 1st Defendant (counterclaim): Lai Lap Kee (黎立基)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
1 December 2021
Case Number
HCA295/2016
Procedural Posture
Civil (consolidated Actions) / Interlocutory Application to Permit Witness Evidence by VCF
Outcome
Leave granted to witness Lai Lap Ming to give his oral evidence by video conferencing facilities (VCF).
Legal Topics
Video Conferencing (vcf), Witness Testimony, Practice Direction 29, Quarantine Restrictions, Credibility Assessment
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Evidence Technology/vcf Cross Border Litigation Public Health (quarantine) Video Conferencing (vcf) Witness Testimony Practice Direction 29 +2 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 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Seto Sha Li

Plaintiff (original Action); 2nd Defendant (counterclaim)

Lai Jin Tong

1st Defendant (original Action); Plaintiff (counterclaim)

Lai Sin Han Isabel

2nd Defendant (original Action)

Lai Lap Kee (黎立基)

1st Defendant (counterclaim)

Procedural Posture

Civil (consolidated Actions) / Interlocutory Application to Permit Witness Evidence by VCF

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to permit a witness to give evidence via video conferencing facilities (VCF)
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has provided valid reasons to justify departure from in-court testimony
  3. 3 Whether permitting VCF would cause prejudice to the other party and affect credibility assessment

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was granted because the court exercised its discretion in favor of VCF after concluding the applicant supplied valid reasons: the witness resides in Taiwan and pandemic quarantine requirements (total 35 days) would likely prevent physical attendance; concurrent civil and criminal proceedings in Taiwan during the quarantine risked loss of rights or penalties; prejudice to the other party was not shown to be serious given the timing of the application; thus VCF was necessary to ensure fair and efficient disposal of the proceedings.

Court Disposition

Leave granted to witness Lai Lap Ming to give his oral evidence by video conferencing facilities (VCF).

Orders

  • Leave granted to Lai Lap Ming to give his oral evidence by video conferencing facilities (VCF).