EAA SECURITIES LTD v. FATTYDAD ALICE PUI YAN, the Administratrix of the Estate of Fattydad Henry, Deceased

EAA SECURITIES LTD v. FATTYDAD ALICE PUI YAN, the Administratrix of the Estate of Fattydad Henry, Deceased

The proposed amendments would introduce a contractual cause of action based on an implied term that was not pleaded at the time of filing and which, on the facts, would revive claims arising from sales in 2000 and thus be time-barred; the court therefore refused to exercise its discretion to allow those aspects of the amendment and struck out prayers (A) and (C) while permitting other amendments.

Citation
EAA SECURITIES LTD v. FATTYDAD ALICE PUI YAN, the Administratrix of the Estate of Fattydad Henry, Deceased
Parties
Plaintiff: EAA SECURITIES LIMITED; 2nd Defendant (administratrix of the Estate of FATTYDAD Henry, Deceased): FATTYDAD ALICE PUI YAN; 1st Defendant / Third Party: SO TAI FAI
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
11 September 2013
Case Number
HCA2520/2009
Procedural Posture
High Court of the Hong Kong SAR Civil Action (consolidated Actions) / Application to Amend Counter Claim; Ruling on Amendment to Pleadings
Outcome
Part of the application to amend the 2nd defendant's counter-claim refused; prayers (A) and (C) struck out; other proposed amendments allowed.
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Implied Contractual Term, Delivery Up of Shares, Proprietary Rights, Time Bar/limitation, Striking Out
Source Language
EN
Contract Property Civil Procedure Limitation Amendment of Pleadings Implied Contractual Term Delivery Up of Shares Proprietary Rights +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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

EAA SECURITIES LIMITED

Plaintiff

FATTYDAD ALICE PUI YAN

2nd Defendant (administratrix of the Estate of FATTYDAD Henry, Deceased)

SO TAI FAI

1st Defendant / Third Party

Procedural Posture

High Court of the Hong Kong SAR Civil Action (consolidated Actions) / Application to Amend Counter Claim; Ruling on Amendment to Pleadings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the proposed amendment properly pleads a cause of action based on an implied contractual term
  2. 2 Whether the claim founded on the implied term is time-barred
  3. 3 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to allow a late amendment

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed amendments would introduce a contractual cause of action based on an implied term that was not pleaded at the time of filing and which, on the facts, would revive claims arising from sales in 2000 and thus be time-barred; the court therefore refused to exercise its discretion to allow those aspects of the amendment and struck out prayers (A) and (C) while permitting other amendments.

Court Disposition

Part of the application to amend the 2nd defendant's counter-claim refused; prayers (A) and (C) struck out; other proposed amendments allowed.

Orders

  • Proposed amendments relating to prayers (A) and (C) are not allowed
  • Prayers (A) and (C) struck out