CHI DONG EUN v. CHOI SUNG MIN AND OTHERS

CHI DONG EUN v. CHOI SUNG MIN AND OTHERS

The appeal was dismissed because the plaintiff, as beneficiary, lacked locus to sue in his own name for breach of the Grant Letter which was between Cordia and Ms Hyun; the 3rd defendant was not a party to the Grant Letter and no pleaded agency or contractual capacity linked him to liability, so the claim against...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
CHI DONG EUN v. CHOI SUNG MIN AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiff: Chi Dong Eun; 1st Defendant: Choi Sung Min; 2nd Defendant: Cordia Global Limited; 3rd Defendant: Lim Ho Sok
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
27 June 2017
Case Number
HCA2676/2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Contract and Trust Dispute / Appeal by Way of Actual Rehearing Against Striking Out Order
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; order of Master S Lo dated 29 July 2016 striking out the plaintiff's claim against the 3rd defendant affirmed.
Legal Topics
Locus Standi, Privity of Contract, Beneficiary Rights, Striking Out, Agency, Costs
Source Language
en
Contract Trusts Civil Procedure Equity Locus Standi Privity of Contract Beneficiary Rights Striking Out +2 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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chi Dong Eun

Plaintiff

Choi Sung Min

1st Defendant

Cordia Global Limited

2nd Defendant

Lim Ho Sok

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Contract and Trust Dispute / Appeal by Way of Actual Rehearing Against Striking Out Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff has locus to sue under the Grant Letter
  2. 2 Whether a beneficiary can bring a personal cause of action against a third party for breach of a contract held in trust
  3. 3 Whether the 3rd defendant is liable under the Grant Letter or as agent

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the plaintiff, as beneficiary, lacked locus to sue in his own name for breach of the Grant Letter which was between Cordia and Ms Hyun; the 3rd defendant was not a party to the Grant Letter and no pleaded agency or contractual capacity linked him to liability, so the claim against him was properly struck out.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; order of Master S Lo dated 29 July 2016 striking out the plaintiff's claim against the 3rd defendant affirmed.

Orders

  • The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
  • The plaintiff must pay the costs of the appeal to the 3rd defendant, such costs to be taxed if not agreed.