CHEN JINHUI v. WONG KAM SAN AND OTHERS

CHEN JINHUI v. WONG KAM SAN AND OTHERS

Court allowed defendants leave to adduce handwriting expert evidence only in relation to the confirmation letter dated 10 January 2003 and the letter from D1 to Yu Haiyang because those documents were relevant and pleaded; refused leave for expert evidence on other listed originals and for ink‑dating of the work record because defendants failed to show pleaded relevance or to plead forgery; allowed removal of the two originals from the Registry subject to defendants' solicitor's undertaking as to preservation and return; allowed adducing of Dr Yu's medical report without calling the maker as cross‑examination was unnecessary; costs ordered largely each party to bear own with specified...

Citation
CHEN JINHUI v. WONG KAM SAN AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiff: Chen Jinhui; 1st Defendant: Wong Kam San (by guardian ad litem Huang Yuexia); 2nd Defendant: Line Power Limited; 3rd Defendant: Trengei Development Limited; 4th Defendant: Lead Success (Hong Kong) Limited; 5th Defendant: Hawkins Development Limited; 6th Defendant: Superfine Group Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
29 April 2016
Case Number
HCA1524/2012
Procedural Posture
High Court Action (civil) / Interlocutory Applications in Chambers Concerning Expert Evidence and Removal of Originals
Outcome
Defendants' applications partly granted and partly dismissed
Legal Topics
Expert Evidence, Handwriting Authentication, Ink Dating, Removal of Court Documents for Forensic Analysis, Transfer of Shares, Breach of Trust, Knowing Receipt, Limitation, Mental Capacity
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Evidence Trusts and Equitable Remedies Property Law Forensic Evidence Expert Evidence Handwriting Authentication Ink Dating +6 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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chen Jinhui

Plaintiff

Wong Kam San (by guardian ad litem Huang Yuexia)

1st Defendant

Line Power Limited

2nd Defendant

Trengei Development Limited

3rd Defendant

Lead Success (Hong Kong) Limited

4th Defendant

Hawkins Development Limited

5th Defendant

Superfine Group Limited

6th Defendant

Procedural Posture

High Court Action (civil) / Interlocutory Applications in Chambers Concerning Expert Evidence and Removal of Originals

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether defendants may adduce handwriting expert evidence on alleged signatures of D1
  2. 2 Whether defendants may adduce ink/dating expert evidence on P's handwritten work record
  3. 3 Whether originals may be removed from court files for forensic analysis and on what undertakings

Ratio Decidendi

Court allowed defendants leave to adduce handwriting expert evidence only in relation to the confirmation letter dated 10 January 2003 and the letter from D1 to Yu Haiyang because those documents were relevant and pleaded; refused leave for expert evidence on other listed originals and for ink‑dating of the work record because defendants failed to show pleaded relevance or to plead forgery; allowed removal of the two originals from the Registry subject to defendants' solicitor's undertaking as to preservation and return; allowed adducing of Dr Yu's medical report without calling the maker as cross‑examination was unnecessary; costs ordered largely each party to bear own with specified...

Court Disposition

Defendants' applications partly granted and partly dismissed

Orders

  • Defendants granted leave to adduce expert evidence on signature of D1 in the confirmation letter dated 10 January 2003 and the letter from D1 to Yu Haiyang; defendants to serve their expert report within 42 days from obtaining originals from the Court Registry
  • Plaintiff at liberty to serve his expert report in opposition within 42 days upon receipt of defendants' expert report