CHINA MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC (IN LIQUIDATION) AND OTHERS v. WU XIAODONG AND OTHERS
D3's Summons was dismissed because the supplemental statement (Chen 2) is a late, unexplained attempt to introduce expert opinion disguised as factual evidence; the applicant failed to justify the delay or seek expert directions earlier and admission would undermine case management and prejudice other parties.
- Citation
- [2024] HKCFI 278
- Parties
- 1st Plaintiff (in Liquidation): China Medical Technologies, Inc; 2nd Plaintiff: CMED Technologies Ltd; 3rd Plaintiffs (liquidators): Cosimo Borrelli and Yuen Lai Yee (as joint and several liquidators of China Medical Technologies, Inc); 1st Defendant: Wu Xiaodong; 2nd Defendant: Samson Tsang Tak Yung; 3rd Defendant: Chen Zhong; 4th Defendant: Zhu Feng (Charles); 5th Defendant: Chong Wing Hip (in his personal capacity and formerly trading as Kam Hing Trading Co); 6th Defendant: Hao Xiaoqing Allan; 7th Defendant: Supreme Well Investments Limited; 8th Defendant: East Hope International Limited; 9th Defendant: Cheer Link International Limited; 10th Defendant: Innovative Technology Investment Limited; 11th Defendant: Dynamic Sense Limited; 12th Defendant: Time Region Holdings Limited; 13th Defendant: Bi Xiaoqiong (in her personal capacity and as trustee of the Xiao Qiong Bi Trust and the Alisa Wu Irrevocable Trust); 14th Defendant: Worldpro Investments Limited; 15th Defendant: Long Chart Investments Limited; 16th Defendant: Chavis Investments Limited; 17th Defendant: Sinowell International Investment Limited; 18th Defendant: Chengxuan International Ltd; 19th Defendant: Weixiao Medical Technology Limited; 20th Defendant: WB International Holding Pte Ltd; 21st Defendant: Max Prosper Enterprises Limited; 22nd Defendant: Jun Yun Bi; 23rd Defendant: Global Flash Limited
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Jurisdiction
- Hong Kong
- Judgment Date
- 30 January 2024
- Case Number
- HCA3391/2016
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Fraud and Company Insolvency Litigation (claims Arising From Alleged Misappropriation and False Acquisitions) / Pre Trial Case Management Conference; Interlocutory Application (d3's Summons) for Leave to File Supplemental Witness Statement Dismissed
- Outcome
- D3's Summons dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Expert Evidence, Witness Statements, Late Application, Case Management, Valuation Disputes, Costs
- Source Language
- EN
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
China Medical Technologies, Inc
1st Plaintiff (in Liquidation)
CMED Technologies Ltd
2nd Plaintiff
Cosimo Borrelli and Yuen Lai Yee (as joint and several liquidators of China Medical Technologies, Inc)
3rd Plaintiffs (liquidators)
Wu Xiaodong
1st Defendant
Samson Tsang Tak Yung
2nd Defendant
Chen Zhong
3rd Defendant
Zhu Feng (Charles)
4th Defendant
Chong Wing Hip (in his personal capacity and formerly trading as Kam Hing Trading Co)
5th Defendant
Hao Xiaoqing Allan
6th Defendant
Supreme Well Investments Limited
7th Defendant
East Hope International Limited
8th Defendant
Cheer Link International Limited
9th Defendant
Innovative Technology Investment Limited
10th Defendant
Dynamic Sense Limited
11th Defendant
Time Region Holdings Limited
12th Defendant
Bi Xiaoqiong (in her personal capacity and as trustee of the Xiao Qiong Bi Trust and the Alisa Wu Irrevocable Trust)
13th Defendant
Worldpro Investments Limited
14th Defendant
Long Chart Investments Limited
15th Defendant
Chavis Investments Limited
16th Defendant
Sinowell International Investment Limited
17th Defendant
Chengxuan International Ltd
18th Defendant
Weixiao Medical Technology Limited
19th Defendant
WB International Holding Pte Ltd
20th Defendant
Max Prosper Enterprises Limited
21st Defendant
Jun Yun Bi
22nd Defendant
Global Flash Limited
23rd Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Fraud and Company Insolvency Litigation (claims Arising From Alleged Misappropriation and False Acquisitions) / Pre Trial Case Management Conference; Interlocutory Application (d3's Summons) for Leave to File Supplemental Witness Statement Dismissed
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether leave should be granted to file a supplemental factual witness statement that in effect ferries in expert opinion
- 2 Whether the applicant provided a full and frank explanation for the lateness of the application
- 3 Whether a factual witness may properly give opinion evidence on technical matters and the weight to be accorded
Ratio Decidendi
D3's Summons was dismissed because the supplemental statement (Chen 2) is a late, unexplained attempt to introduce expert opinion disguised as factual evidence; the applicant failed to justify the delay or seek expert directions earlier and admission would undermine case management and prejudice other parties.
Court Disposition
D3's Summons dismissed
Orders
- D3's Summons dismissed
- Costs of D3's Summons to the Plaintiffs, to be taxed on a party and party basis, to be paid by the 3rd Defendant forthwith, Certificate for 1 counsel
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment