YEE SANG METAL & BUILDING SUPPLIES CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER v. YIP YEUK PING

YEE SANG METAL & BUILDING SUPPLIES CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER v. YIP YEUK PING

The court allowed the respondents' strike out motion because the applicants failed to establish a realistic, arguable case of perjury amounting to contempt that could be proved beyond reasonable doubt and showing an intent to obstruct the administration of justice; the allegations were insufficiently particularized, undermined by delay and prejudice, and in some respects relied on inadmissible late material, so the contempt proceedings against the 3rd to 5th respondents had no real prospect of success.

Citation
YEE SANG METAL & BUILDING SUPPLIES CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER v. YIP YEUK PING
Parties
1st Applicant: YEE SANG METAL & BUILDING SUPPLIES COMPANY LIMITED; 2nd Applicant (in Liquidation): M & L INVESTMENT COMPANY LTD; 1st Respondent: YIP YEUK PING; 2nd Respondent: LAW KWOK WA; 3rd Respondent: LAI YU TING; 4th Respondent: CHAN KING NIN; 5th Respondent: TSE CHO TSEUNG
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
1 November 2002
Case Number
HCMP2493/2002
Procedural Posture
Application for Committal for Contempt Under Order 52, Rule 2 / Cross Motion to Strike Out Decided at Preliminary Hearing (strike Out Ruling)
Outcome
Cross-motion to strike out granted; contempt proceedings against 3rd to 5th respondents struck out; costs ordered nisi in favour of those respondents.
Legal Topics
Committal, Perjury as Contempt, Strike Out, Delay, Oppression, Affidavit/admissibility
Source Language
EN
Contempt of Court Perjury Civil Procedure Enforcement of Judgment Committal Perjury as Contempt Strike Out Delay +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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

YEE SANG METAL & BUILDING SUPPLIES COMPANY LIMITED

1st Applicant

M & L INVESTMENT COMPANY LTD

2nd Applicant (in Liquidation)

YIP YEUK PING

1st Respondent

LAW KWOK WA

2nd Respondent

LAI YU TING

3rd Respondent

CHAN KING NIN

4th Respondent

TSE CHO TSEUNG

5th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Committal for Contempt Under Order 52, Rule 2 / Cross Motion to Strike Out Decided at Preliminary Hearing (strike Out Ruling)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether alleged false statements amount to perjury constituting contempt of court
  2. 2 Whether the applicants have an arguable case capable of proof beyond reasonable doubt
  3. 3 Whether the pleadings and particulars disclose a reasonable cause of action or are frivolous or vexatious

Ratio Decidendi

The court allowed the respondents' strike out motion because the applicants failed to establish a realistic, arguable case of perjury amounting to contempt that could be proved beyond reasonable doubt and showing an intent to obstruct the administration of justice; the allegations were insufficiently particularized, undermined by delay and prejudice, and in some respects relied on inadmissible late material, so the contempt proceedings against the 3rd to 5th respondents had no real prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Cross-motion to strike out granted; contempt proceedings against 3rd to 5th respondents struck out; costs ordered nisi in favour of those respondents.

Orders

  • Strike out of the contempt proceedings against the 3rd to 5th respondents (Lai Yu Ting, Chan King Nin, Tse Cho Tseung)
  • Costs order nisi in favour of the 3rd to 5th respondents