ASIA WIDE PROPERTIES LTD. AND ANOTHER v. TSANG YUK KIU

ASIA WIDE PROPERTIES LTD. AND ANOTHER v. TSANG YUK KIU

The objection was upheld and the question was disallowed because it invited argument and speculation beyond matters of fact by asking the witness to allege that document-makers fabricated entries to frame him, which the witness could not factually know; the question was therefore improper and disproportionate to the issues of relevance.

Citation
ASIA WIDE PROPERTIES LTD. AND ANOTHER v. TSANG YUK KIU
Parties
1st Plaintiff (a6631/91); Defendant (a9500/94): Tsang Yuk Kiu; 2nd Plaintiff (a6631/91): Y K Construction Company Limited; 1st Defendant (a6631/91): Lucas Sasmito; 2nd Defendant (a6631/91): Tsang Kwong Fun; 1st Plaintiff (a9500/94): Asia Wide Properties Limited; 2nd Plaintiff (a9500/94): Lobley Company Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
26 May 2000
Case Number
HCA9500/1994
Procedural Posture
Civil / Trial Ruling on Objection to Question in Cross Examination
Outcome
Objection upheld; question disallowed
Legal Topics
Cross Examination, Improper Question, Fabrication of Documents, Conspiracy Allegation, Joint Venture, Commission Payment
Source Language
EN
Evidence Civil Procedure Property Company Law Cross Examination Improper Question Fabrication of Documents Conspiracy Allegation +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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tsang Yuk Kiu

1st Plaintiff (a6631/91); Defendant (a9500/94)

Y K Construction Company Limited

2nd Plaintiff (a6631/91)

Lucas Sasmito

1st Defendant (a6631/91)

Tsang Kwong Fun

2nd Defendant (a6631/91)

Asia Wide Properties Limited

1st Plaintiff (a9500/94)

Lobley Company Limited

2nd Plaintiff (a9500/94)

Procedural Posture

Civil / Trial Ruling on Objection to Question in Cross Examination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a question in cross-examination that invites argument or asks the witness to speculate about a conspiracy or fabrication is admissible
  2. 2 Whether a witness may be asked to accuse the makers of documents of framing him when the witness has no factual basis to know such a conspiracy
  3. 3 Whether asking whether accounting entries were fabricated to frame the witness is proper factual enquiry

Ratio Decidendi

The objection was upheld and the question was disallowed because it invited argument and speculation beyond matters of fact by asking the witness to allege that document-makers fabricated entries to frame him, which the witness could not factually know; the question was therefore improper and disproportionate to the issues of relevance.

Court Disposition

Objection upheld; question disallowed

Orders

  • Question disallowed; counsel not to put that question to PW1