UPPLAN CO LTD v. LI HO MING AND ANOTHER

UPPLAN CO LTD v. LI HO MING AND ANOTHER

The court ordered that the main action trial proceed whether or not the Discovery Summons has been disposed of and varied the previous timetable accordingly; the court exercised its case management power under Order 25 r1B, made no order as to costs between plaintiff and defendants for the application, and ordered...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
UPPLAN CO LTD v. LI HO MING AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff (original Action); 1st Defendant (counterclaim): Upplan Company Limited (快盈有限公司); 1st Defendant (original Action); Plaintiff (counterclaim): Li Ho Ming (李皓明); 2nd Defendant (original Action): Rainbow Point Limited; 2nd Defendant (counterclaim): Li Ho Ping; 3rd Defendant (counterclaim): Wong Oi Ping; 4th Defendant (counterclaim): Li Siu Lung; Receivers: Joint and Several Receivers
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
14 March 2017
Case Number
HCA1915/2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Action With Counterclaim Involving Receivership and Discovery Application / Pre Trial Case Management: Application to Vary Timetable and Adjourn or Ignore Pending Discovery Summons Prior to Trial
Outcome
Application granted in part: trial ordered to proceed irrespective of the pending Discovery Summons; timetable varied; specific costs orders made.
Legal Topics
Case Management, Discovery, Adjournment, Receivership Duties, Costs of Application
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Insolvency/receivership Costs Law Case Management Discovery Adjournment Receivership Duties Costs of Application

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Upplan Company Limited (快盈有限公司)

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

Li Ho Ming (李皓明)

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

Rainbow Point Limited

2nd Defendant (original Action)

Li Ho Ping

2nd Defendant (counterclaim)

Wong Oi Ping

3rd Defendant (counterclaim)

Li Siu Lung

4th Defendant (counterclaim)

Joint and Several Receivers

Receivers

Procedural Posture

Civil Action With Counterclaim Involving Receivership and Discovery Application / Pre Trial Case Management: Application to Vary Timetable and Adjourn or Ignore Pending Discovery Summons Prior to Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial may proceed notwithstanding a pending Discovery Summons
  2. 2 Whether the Discovery Summons should be adjourned pending the main action
  3. 3 Who should bear the costs of the present application and the Receivers' costs

Ratio Decidendi

The court ordered that the main action trial proceed whether or not the Discovery Summons has been disposed of and varied the previous timetable accordingly; the court exercised its case management power under Order 25 r1B, made no order as to costs between plaintiff and defendants for the application, and ordered Upplan to pay the Receivers' costs (with counsel certificate), to be taxed if not agreed.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part: trial ordered to proceed irrespective of the pending Discovery Summons; timetable varied; specific costs orders made.

Orders

  • The trial of the main action shall proceed whether or not the Discovery Summons has been disposed of
  • The direction/timetable at paragraph 1 of the Court Order made on 27 June 2012 is varied to allow the trial to proceed as ordered