CHAN SZE WING v. CONGRUENCE CHINESE MEDICINE & JING LUO HEALTH LTD AND ANOTHER

CHAN SZE WING v. CONGRUENCE CHINESE MEDICINE & JING LUO HEALTH LTD AND ANOTHER

The sealed judgment was corrected under the slip rule and, insofar as necessary, under the Court's inherent jurisdiction to include the Company as liable to deliver up the title deeds so as to give effect to the clear intention of the original judgment; permission for TPC to represent the Company was refused for...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 3355
Parties
Plaintiff: Chan Sze Wing; 1st Defendant: Congruence Chinese Medicine (the Company); 2nd Defendant: 2nd Defendant (individual)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
9 November 2021
Case Number
HCA866/2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Enforcement/variation of Sealed Judgment / Post‑trial/post‑judgment Variation
Outcome
Application granted to vary sealed judgment to require delivery up of title deeds by the Company (1st Defendant) and/or the 2nd Defendant; TPC not permitted to represent the Company; costs awarded to the plaintiff against the Company
Legal Topics
Variation of Sealed Judgment, Slip Rule, Inherent Jurisdiction, Corporate Representation by Director, Delivery Up of Title Deeds, Sham Conveyance/annulment of Assignment, Costs
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Company Law Property Law Enforcement of Judgment Variation of Sealed Judgment Slip Rule Inherent Jurisdiction Corporate Representation by Director +3 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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chan Sze Wing

Plaintiff

Congruence Chinese Medicine (the Company)

1st Defendant

2nd Defendant (individual)

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Enforcement/variation of Sealed Judgment / Post‑trial/post‑judgment Variation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sealed judgment should be varied under the slip rule and/or inherent jurisdiction to require the Company to deliver title deeds
  2. 2 Whether TPC (a director/shareholder) may represent the Company in these proceedings
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to an order for delivery up of the title deeds to facilitate enforcement

Ratio Decidendi

The sealed judgment was corrected under the slip rule and, insofar as necessary, under the Court's inherent jurisdiction to include the Company as liable to deliver up the title deeds so as to give effect to the clear intention of the original judgment; permission for TPC to represent the Company was refused for want of proper statutory process and material; costs of the summons were ordered to be paid by the Company to the plaintiff.

Court Disposition

Application granted to vary sealed judgment to require delivery up of title deeds by the Company (1st Defendant) and/or the 2nd Defendant; TPC not permitted to represent the Company; costs awarded to the plaintiff against the Company

Orders

  • Sealed Judgment amended so that title deeds of the Property be delivered up by 1st Defendant and/or the 2nd Defendant to the plaintiff's solicitors forthwith pending correction of Land Register and until satisfaction of the judgment debts or further order
  • Amendment may also be made under the Court's inherent jurisdiction to give effect to the judgment's plain intention