SHE WAI HUNG v. JULIANO LIM AND OTHERS

SHE WAI HUNG v. JULIANO LIM AND OTHERS

Because the appellant conceded that the Respondent's Notice was not a cross-appeal and no evidence of significant prejudice was shown, the court applied the lower threshold for respondent's notices to affirm and granted an extension of time to serve the Respondent's Notice, subject to time limits (serve within 7 days and lodge within 2 days).

Citation
SHE WAI HUNG v. JULIANO LIM AND OTHERS
Parties
Petitioner: She Wai Hung; 1st Respondent: Juliano Lim; 2nd Respondent: Johnathan Lim; 3rd Respondent: Golden Bright Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
25 January 2008
Case Number
HCMP86/2008
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Proceedings Extension of Time to Serve Respondent's Notice (appeal) / Decision (court of Appeal, in Chambers)
Outcome
Extension of time granted
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Respondent's Notice, Cross Appeal, Valuation Dispute, S.168 a Buy Out, Costs
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Company Law Appeals Extension of Time Respondent's Notice Cross Appeal Valuation Dispute S.168 a Buy Out +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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

She Wai Hung

Petitioner

Juliano Lim

1st Respondent

Johnathan Lim

2nd Respondent

Golden Bright Limited

3rd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Proceedings Extension of Time to Serve Respondent's Notice (appeal) / Decision (court of Appeal, in Chambers)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant an extension of time to serve a Respondent's Notice
  2. 2 Whether the Respondent's Notice is a cross-appeal attracting a stricter test
  3. 3 Whether granting an extension would cause significant prejudice to the appellant

Ratio Decidendi

Because the appellant conceded that the Respondent's Notice was not a cross-appeal and no evidence of significant prejudice was shown, the court applied the lower threshold for respondent's notices to affirm and granted an extension of time to serve the Respondent's Notice, subject to time limits (serve within 7 days and lodge within 2 days).

Court Disposition

Extension of time granted

Orders

  • Time extended for respondent to serve Respondent's Notice within 7 days from date of decision
  • Respondent's Notice to be lodged at court within 2 days after service