TSANG WOON MING v. LAI KA LIM also known as LAI KAI LIM AND OTHERS

TSANG WOON MING v. LAI KA LIM also known as LAI KAI LIM AND OTHERS

Application refused in respect of Lin and Ho because the application was late, lacked good reason (witnesses could have quarantined after advance notice of GAP expiry), convenience and business commitments do not justify VCF for witnesses whose credibility is central, and VCF would cause prejudice and impair proper assessment of evidence; application granted for Ms Li Biyun because there was accepted evidence she could not travel and practical arrangements for a single VCF witness could be made without causing adjournment or prejudice.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 891
Parties
Petitioner / 1st Defendant (in Related Actions): TSANG WOON MING; 1st Respondent: LAI KA LIM (also known as LAI KAI LIM); 2nd Respondent: LIN WAI HSIEN (also known as LIN WEI HSIEN); 3rd Respondent: YILIGU INVESTMENT LIMITED; 4th Respondent / Plaintiff (in HCMP 2689/2017): NOBILITY SCHOOL LIMITED; Plaintiff (in HCA 33/2017): KING’S GLORY EDUCATIONAL CENTRE LIMITED; 2nd Defendant (in HCMP 2689/2017): KING’S GLORY NOBLE EDUCATION GROUP LIMITED; 2nd Defendant (in HCA 33/2017): YAN KING TONG THOMAS; 3rd Defendant (in HCA 33/2017): LUI MAN NORMAN
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
20 May 2020
Case Number
HCCW407/2016
Procedural Posture
Companies Winding Up Proceedings and Related Civil Actions Consolidated for Trial / Pre Trial Application (leave to Give Evidence by Video Link) Hearing in Chambers Two Working Days Before Trial
Outcome
Application partly granted and partly refused: refused for Lin Wai Hsien and the beneficial owner of the 3rd Respondent (Ho); granted for Ms Li Biyun only
Legal Topics
Video Conferencing Evidence (vcf), Witness Attendance and Credibility, Trial Adjournment, Practice Direction 29 Compliance, Shareholders' Dispute
Source Language
EN
Company Law Civil Procedure Evidence Public Health / Quarantine (covid 19) Video Conferencing Evidence (vcf) Witness Attendance and Credibility Trial Adjournment Practice Direction 29 Compliance +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 6 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

TSANG WOON MING

Petitioner / 1st Defendant (in Related Actions)

LAI KA LIM (also known as LAI KAI LIM)

1st Respondent

LIN WAI HSIEN (also known as LIN WEI HSIEN)

2nd Respondent

YILIGU INVESTMENT LIMITED

3rd Respondent

NOBILITY SCHOOL LIMITED

4th Respondent / Plaintiff (in HCMP 2689/2017)

KING’S GLORY EDUCATIONAL CENTRE LIMITED

Plaintiff (in HCA 33/2017)

KING’S GLORY NOBLE EDUCATION GROUP LIMITED

2nd Defendant (in HCMP 2689/2017)

YAN KING TONG THOMAS

2nd Defendant (in HCA 33/2017)

LUI MAN NORMAN

3rd Defendant (in HCA 33/2017)

Procedural Posture

Companies Winding Up Proceedings and Related Civil Actions Consolidated for Trial / Pre Trial Application (leave to Give Evidence by Video Link) Hearing in Chambers Two Working Days Before Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to permit witnesses to give evidence by video conferencing facilities (VCF)
  2. 2 Whether COVID-19 travel and quarantine restrictions justify departure from in‑person evidence
  3. 3 Whether lateness of application and convenience of witnesses justify VCF

Ratio Decidendi

Application refused in respect of Lin and Ho because the application was late, lacked good reason (witnesses could have quarantined after advance notice of GAP expiry), convenience and business commitments do not justify VCF for witnesses whose credibility is central, and VCF would cause prejudice and impair proper assessment of evidence; application granted for Ms Li Biyun because there was accepted evidence she could not travel and practical arrangements for a single VCF witness could be made without causing adjournment or prejudice.

Court Disposition

Application partly granted and partly refused: refused for Lin Wai Hsien and the beneficial owner of the 3rd Respondent (Ho); granted for Ms Li Biyun only

Orders

  • Leave to give evidence by video link granted for Ms Li Biyun only
  • Application to give evidence by video link refused for Lin Wai Hsien and the beneficial owner of Yiligu Investment Limited