CHAN KAI YAN AND ANOTHER v. LEUNG CHI KIT AND OTHERS

CHAN KAI YAN AND ANOTHER v. LEUNG CHI KIT AND OTHERS

The court exercised its case management discretion under Order 38 r 4A to permit the expert opinion evidence already provided in HCA 1357/2012 to stand also as evidence in HCA 2498/2014 because the evidence was relevant to common issues between the actions and the trial timetable (expert tranche in March 2024) afforded sufficient time for defendants to obtain responsive expert reports; the defendants were granted leave to adduce responsive expert evidence and the parties were directed to agree a generous timetable and convene expert meetings and a joint report; costs reserved.

Citation
[2023] HKCFI 2410
Parties
Plaintiff in HCA 1357/2012; 6th Defendant in HCA 2498/2014: Sun Hing Ginza Limited; 1st Defendant in HCA 1357/2012; 1st Plaintiff in HCA 2498/2014: Chan Kai Yan; 2nd Defendant in HCA 1357/2012 (administrator of the Estate of Chiu Che Kuen); 2nd Plaintiff in HCA 2498/2014: To Yuk Ling; 3rd Defendant in HCA 1357/2012 (in Compulsory Liquidation); Subject of Related Third Party Proceedings: Lucky Ford Industrial Limited; 1st Third Party in HCA 1357/2012; 1st Defendant in HCA 2498/2014: Leung Chi Kit; 2nd Third Party in HCA 1357/2012; 2nd Defendant in HCA 2498/2014: Shiu Kwok Kuen; 3rd Third Party in HCA 1357/2012: Mega Power International Investment Limited; 4th Third Party in HCA 1357/2012: King Star International Investment Limited; 5th Third Party in HCA 1357/2012: Wellful International Investment Limited; 3rd Defendant in HCA 2498/2014 (proceedings Not Joined; Deceased): Ng Choi Chi; 4th Defendant in HCA 2498/2014 (not Served; Will Give Evidence): Wong Hoi Ming; 5th Defendant in HCA 2498/2014: Choi Wai Kit
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
29 September 2023
Case Number
HCA2498/2014
Procedural Posture
Civil (company/shareholder Dispute) / Pre Trial Directions (permission to Use Expert Evidence Across Related Actions) Decision Delivered at PTR
Outcome
Expert opinion evidence filed in HCA 1357/2012 is permitted to stand as evidence in HCA 2498/2014; D1, D2 & D5 granted leave to adduce responsive expert evidence which shall also stand in both actions; parties to agree timetable for production and joint expert report; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
Dividend Distribution, Winding Up, Shareholders' Agreement, Misrepresentation, Misappropriation of Funds, Expert Evidence Admissibility, Case Management
Source Language
EN
Company Law Civil Procedure Evidence Law Dividend Distribution Winding Up Shareholders' Agreement Misrepresentation Misappropriation of Funds +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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sun Hing Ginza Limited

Plaintiff in HCA 1357/2012; 6th Defendant in HCA 2498/2014

Chan Kai Yan

1st Defendant in HCA 1357/2012; 1st Plaintiff in HCA 2498/2014

To Yuk Ling

2nd Defendant in HCA 1357/2012 (administrator of the Estate of Chiu Che Kuen); 2nd Plaintiff in HCA 2498/2014

Lucky Ford Industrial Limited

3rd Defendant in HCA 1357/2012 (in Compulsory Liquidation); Subject of Related Third Party Proceedings

Leung Chi Kit

1st Third Party in HCA 1357/2012; 1st Defendant in HCA 2498/2014

Shiu Kwok Kuen

2nd Third Party in HCA 1357/2012; 2nd Defendant in HCA 2498/2014

Mega Power International Investment Limited

3rd Third Party in HCA 1357/2012

King Star International Investment Limited

4th Third Party in HCA 1357/2012

Wellful International Investment Limited

5th Third Party in HCA 1357/2012

Ng Choi Chi

3rd Defendant in HCA 2498/2014 (proceedings Not Joined; Deceased)

Wong Hoi Ming

4th Defendant in HCA 2498/2014 (not Served; Will Give Evidence)

Choi Wai Kit

5th Defendant in HCA 2498/2014

Procedural Posture

Civil (company/shareholder Dispute) / Pre Trial Directions (permission to Use Expert Evidence Across Related Actions) Decision Delivered at PTR

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the expert report prepared for HCA 1357/2012 may be used in HCA 2498/2014
  2. 2 Whether the defendants (D1, D2 & D5) should be permitted to adduce responsive expert evidence and the procedure for doing so
  3. 3 Whether admitting the expert evidence would cause prejudice or disruption to trial preparation and timetable

Ratio Decidendi

The court exercised its case management discretion under Order 38 r 4A to permit the expert opinion evidence already provided in HCA 1357/2012 to stand also as evidence in HCA 2498/2014 because the evidence was relevant to common issues between the actions and the trial timetable (expert tranche in March 2024) afforded sufficient time for defendants to obtain responsive expert reports; the defendants were granted leave to adduce responsive expert evidence and the parties were directed to agree a generous timetable and convene expert meetings and a joint report; costs reserved.

Court Disposition

Expert opinion evidence filed in HCA 1357/2012 is permitted to stand as evidence in HCA 2498/2014; D1, D2 & D5 granted leave to adduce responsive expert evidence which shall also stand in both actions; parties to agree timetable for production and joint expert report; costs reserved.

Orders

  • Expert opinion evidence already provided in HCA 1357/2012 to stand as evidence in HCA 2498/2014 under Order 38 r 4A
  • Leave granted to D1, D2 & D5 to adduce their own expert opinion evidence in response; that responsive evidence to stand in both actions