CHAN MING HUNG v. TRIGENIUS TELEGAME TECHDEVELOP LTD

CHAN MING HUNG v. TRIGENIUS TELEGAME TECHDEVELOP LTD

The court set aside the default judgment and the charging order because the defendant's evidence demonstrated a defence that could well be believed at trial (real prospect of success), plaintiff failed to provide particulars or documents for the alleged payments, and the plaintiff knowingly served a registered office he knew would be unattended thereby depriving the directors of notice; consequently the judgment and charging order were discharged and costs were awarded to the defendant.

Citation
CHAN MING HUNG v. TRIGENIUS TELEGAME TECHDEVELOP LTD
Parties
Plaintiff: CHAN MING HUNG; Defendant: TRIGENIUS TELEGAME; Defendant: TECHDEVELOP LIMITED
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
4 July 2007
Case Number
DCCJ3418/2006
Procedural Posture
Civil Debt/enforcement / Application to Set Aside Default Judgment and Charging Order (interlocutory)
Outcome
Default judgment entered 29 August 2006 and charging order absolute dated 9 October 2006 set aside; costs awarded to defendant; amendment to times in summons; certificate for counsel granted.
Legal Topics
Setting Aside Default Judgment, Charging Order, Service on Registered Office, Particulars of Claim, Affidavit Evidence, Costs and Counsel Certificate
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Company Law Debt Enforcement Evidence Setting Aside Default Judgment Charging Order Service on Registered Office Particulars of Claim +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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CHAN MING HUNG

Plaintiff

TRIGENIUS TELEGAME

Defendant

TECHDEVELOP LIMITED

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Debt/enforcement / Application to Set Aside Default Judgment and Charging Order (interlocutory)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the default judgment and charging order should be set aside
  2. 2 Whether the defendant's pleaded defence has a real prospect of success at trial
  3. 3 Whether service on the registered office was sufficient in the circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

The court set aside the default judgment and the charging order because the defendant's evidence demonstrated a defence that could well be believed at trial (real prospect of success), plaintiff failed to provide particulars or documents for the alleged payments, and the plaintiff knowingly served a registered office he knew would be unattended thereby depriving the directors of notice; consequently the judgment and charging order were discharged and costs were awarded to the defendant.

Court Disposition

Default judgment entered 29 August 2006 and charging order absolute dated 9 October 2006 set aside; costs awarded to defendant; amendment to times in summons; certificate for counsel granted.

Orders

  • Set aside the judgment entered against the Defendant on 29 August 2006.
  • Set aside the charging order absolute dated 9 October 2006.