YIP SUEN PUN v. WONG KA KEE t/a C&K ENGINEERING CO AND OTHERS

YIP SUEN PUN v. WONG KA KEE t/a C&K ENGINEERING CO AND OTHERS

The consent order constituted a judgment debt from the date it was made (27 June 2006); the phrase 'inclusive of interest' referred to pre‑judgment interest and did not suspend accrual of statutory post‑judgment interest; absent clear express language to the contrary a stay of execution does not prevent post‑judgment interest from accruing, therefore interest at the judgment rate is payable from 27 June 2006.

Citation
YIP SUEN PUN v. WONG KA KEE t/a C&K ENGINEERING CO AND OTHERS
Parties
7th Defendant: HENDERSON REAL ESTATE AGENCY LIMITED
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
27 October 2006
Case Number
HCPI848/2003
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Action / Chambers Hearing on Summons Concerning Post‑settlement Interest Accrual
Outcome
Summons dated 29 September 2006 dismissed
Legal Topics
Consent Order, Stay of Execution, Post‑judgment Interest, High Court Ordinance S.49(1)
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Judgment Enforcement Contract Personal Injury Statutory Interest Consent Order Stay of Execution Post‑judgment Interest +1 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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HENDERSON REAL ESTATE AGENCY LIMITED

7th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Action / Chambers Hearing on Summons Concerning Post‑settlement Interest Accrual

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether interest at the judgment rate on the consent order judgment accrues from the date the consent order was made or from the expiry of the agreed stay of execution
  2. 2 Whether the consent order crystallised principal and post‑judgment interest so that interest should not accrue during the stay
  3. 3 Whether the consent order judgment constituted a judgment debt under s.49(1) only after the stay expired

Ratio Decidendi

The consent order constituted a judgment debt from the date it was made (27 June 2006); the phrase 'inclusive of interest' referred to pre‑judgment interest and did not suspend accrual of statutory post‑judgment interest; absent clear express language to the contrary a stay of execution does not prevent post‑judgment interest from accruing, therefore interest at the judgment rate is payable from 27 June 2006.

Court Disposition

Summons dated 29 September 2006 dismissed

Orders

  • Summons dated 29 September 2006 dismissed
  • Interest at the judgment rate payable on the judgment sum from 27 June 2006