CHARM MASTER INTERPRISES LTD v. GRAND T G GOLD HOLDINGS LTD AND ANOTHER
The Court held that the 2019 statutory declaration must be excluded unless its maker, Robin Lee, attends for cross-examination because statutory declarations made to support litigation are treated like affirmations and subject to Order 38; the 2 May 2008 letter is a historical document whose admissibility is not dependent on Robin Lee's attendance; leave to amend the defence and counterclaim and to file the 2nd supplemental witness statement was granted because the proposed Separate Agreement amendments were not bound to fail and were relevant to determining entitlement to the sums paid into court; the court can determine factual issues affecting a non-party but cannot grant personal...
- Citation
- [2022] HKCFI 1408
- Parties
- Plaintiff: CHARM MASTER INTERPRISES LIMITED; 1st Defendant: GRAND T G GOLD HOLDINGS LIMITED; 2nd Defendant: J THOMSON ASSET INVESTMENT LIMITED
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Jurisdiction
- Hong Kong
- Judgment Date
- 13 May 2022
- Case Number
- HCA397/2011
- Procedural Posture
- Interpleader Action / Case Management Conference / Pre Trial
- Outcome
- Plaintiff's application partly allowed: statutory declaration excluded unless maker attends; application to compel D2 to secure attendance refused; D2's applications to amend and to file supplemental witness statement allowed with conditions and directions and costs orders on a nisi basis.
- Legal Topics
- Statutory Declaration, Hearsay Evidence, Subpoena, Order 38 Rules, Amendment of Pleadings, Letters of Acknowledgment, Promissory Notes, Costs
- Source Language
- EN
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
CHARM MASTER INTERPRISES LIMITED
Plaintiff
GRAND T G GOLD HOLDINGS LIMITED
1st Defendant
J THOMSON ASSET INVESTMENT LIMITED
2nd Defendant
Procedural Posture
Interpleader Action / Case Management Conference / Pre Trial
Legal Issues
- 1 Existence and scope of alleged trust over notes
- 2 Beneficial entitlement to HK$12,000,000 versus HK$12,500,000
- 3 Authenticity of signature on 2 May 2008 letter
Ratio Decidendi
The Court held that the 2019 statutory declaration must be excluded unless its maker, Robin Lee, attends for cross-examination because statutory declarations made to support litigation are treated like affirmations and subject to Order 38; the 2 May 2008 letter is a historical document whose admissibility is not dependent on Robin Lee's attendance; leave to amend the defence and counterclaim and to file the 2nd supplemental witness statement was granted because the proposed Separate Agreement amendments were not bound to fail and were relevant to determining entitlement to the sums paid into court; the court can determine factual issues affecting a non-party but cannot grant personal...
Court Disposition
Plaintiff's application partly allowed: statutory declaration excluded unless maker attends; application to compel D2 to secure attendance refused; D2's applications to amend and to file supplemental witness statement allowed with conditions and directions and costs orders on a nisi basis.
Orders
- Unless Robin Lee attends for cross-examination his Statutory Declaration dated 13 March 2019 shall be excluded from evidence
- No order compelling D2 to secure the attendance of Robin Lee; D2 may apply for a subpoena if necessary
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment