GTC INDUSTRIES LTD AND OTHERS v. LEE MAN HOI OCEAN AND OTHERS

GTC INDUSTRIES LTD AND OTHERS v. LEE MAN HOI OCEAN AND OTHERS

Where directions for expert evidence had been given at prior case management conferences and the defendants failed to show sufficient prior consultation with their expert, the court will grant a limited extension subject to an unless order: defendants must serve the expert reply report by 4:00 p.m. on 15 February 2013 or be debarred from adducing that report; costs of the interlocutory hearing are awarded to the plaintiffs.

Citation
GTC INDUSTRIES LTD AND OTHERS v. LEE MAN HOI OCEAN AND OTHERS
Parties
1st Plaintiff: GTC INDUSTRIES LIMITED; 2nd Plaintiff: PIMATRONICS LIMITED; 3rd Plaintiff: 紹萬科技(深圳)有限公司; 1st Defendant: LEE MAN HOI OCEAN (李敏海); 2nd Defendant: YUEN KIN TONG (袁健堂); 3rd Defendant: MW CHINA RESOURCES SOLUTIONS LIMITED (茂榮資源管理有限公司)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
4 January 2013
Case Number
HCA600/2012
Procedural Posture
Civil (breach of Fiduciary Duty; Employment Contract) / Interlocutory Application for Extension of Time to Serve Expert Report; Case Management
Outcome
Order made: defendants granted a limited extension subject to an unless order; costs awarded to plaintiffs.
Legal Topics
Expert Evidence, Extension of Time, Unless Order, Case Management, Costs
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Evidence Employment Law Commercial Law Expert Evidence Extension of Time Unless Order Case Management +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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

GTC INDUSTRIES LIMITED

1st Plaintiff

PIMATRONICS LIMITED

2nd Plaintiff

紹萬科技(深圳)有限公司

3rd Plaintiff

LEE MAN HOI OCEAN (李敏海)

1st Defendant

YUEN KIN TONG (袁健堂)

2nd Defendant

MW CHINA RESOURCES SOLUTIONS LIMITED (茂榮資源管理有限公司)

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (breach of Fiduciary Duty; Employment Contract) / Interlocutory Application for Extension of Time to Serve Expert Report; Case Management

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant extension to serve expert reply report
  2. 2 Whether to impose an unless order as condition of any extension
  3. 3 Whether applicant consulted its expert before seeking extension

Ratio Decidendi

Where directions for expert evidence had been given at prior case management conferences and the defendants failed to show sufficient prior consultation with their expert, the court will grant a limited extension subject to an unless order: defendants must serve the expert reply report by 4:00 p.m. on 15 February 2013 or be debarred from adducing that report; costs of the interlocutory hearing are awarded to the plaintiffs.

Court Disposition

Order made: defendants granted a limited extension subject to an unless order; costs awarded to plaintiffs.

Orders

  • Unless the 2nd defendant and the 3rd defendant serve the expert report in reply by 4:00 p.m. on 15 February 2013, the 2nd defendant and the 3rd defendant are debarred from adducing the expert report in reply.
  • Costs of today's hearing in the sum of HKD 1,500 to be paid to the plaintiffs within 14 days.