THE WING ON BANK LTD. AND ANOTHER v. WAI MAN ESTATES LTD. AND ANOTHER

THE WING ON BANK LTD. AND ANOTHER v. WAI MAN ESTATES LTD. AND ANOTHER

Leave to re-amend was granted because it was not plain and obvious that the proposed conspiracy and misrepresentation pleadings failed to disclose a cause of action or were incapable of proof; credibility and evidential disputes could not be resolved on affidavit and the amendments were sufficiently particularized...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
THE WING ON BANK LTD. AND ANOTHER v. WAI MAN ESTATES LTD. AND ANOTHER
Parties
1st Plaintiff: THE WING ON BANK LIMITED; 2nd Plaintiff: THE WING ON FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED; 1st Defendant: WAI MAN ESTATES LIMITED; 2nd Defendant: LAWRENCE TSE SOON CHEUNG (also known as LAWRENCE CHEUNG TSE SOON)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
22 June 1989
Case Number
HCA1118/1986
Procedural Posture
Civil Claim for Debts and Tort (conspiracy, Misrepresentation) / Application for Leave to Amend Pleadings (pre Trial)
Outcome
Application allowed; leave granted to re-amend the re-amended Statement of Claim
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Civil Conspiracy, Misrepresentation, Abuse of Process, Summary Judgment
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Tort Fraud Contract Law Banking Regulation Amendment of Pleadings Civil Conspiracy Misrepresentation +2 more

Source-derived case record

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

THE WING ON BANK LIMITED

1st Plaintiff

THE WING ON FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED

2nd Plaintiff

WAI MAN ESTATES LIMITED

1st Defendant

LAWRENCE TSE SOON CHEUNG (also known as LAWRENCE CHEUNG TSE SOON)

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Claim for Debts and Tort (conspiracy, Misrepresentation) / Application for Leave to Amend Pleadings (pre Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave should be granted to re-amend the re-amended Statement of Claim to plead conspiracy and misrepresentation
  2. 2 Whether the proposed conspiracy pleading discloses a cause of action given authorities requiring a sole or predominant intent to injure
  3. 3 Whether the proposed amendments are frivolous, vexatious or an abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to re-amend was granted because it was not plain and obvious that the proposed conspiracy and misrepresentation pleadings failed to disclose a cause of action or were incapable of proof; credibility and evidential disputes could not be resolved on affidavit and the amendments were sufficiently particularized to permit the matters to be ventilated at trial.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; leave granted to re-amend the re-amended Statement of Claim

Orders

  • Leave granted to the plaintiffs to re-amend the re-amended Statement of Claim to plead conspiracy and misrepresentation as particularised
  • Parties to be heard as to the terms upon which leave is granted, any directions, and costs