SINO TRIFONE LTD v. FOND EXPRESS LOGISTICS LTD AND ANOTHER

SINO TRIFONE LTD v. FOND EXPRESS LOGISTICS LTD AND ANOTHER

The notices of motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal were dismissed because the 2nd defendant failed to show the intended appeals had a real prospect of success or raised questions of great or public importance justifying leave from a discretionary refusal to extend time; the court declined to adjourn or to permit representation by a director and ordered the 2nd defendant to pay the plaintiffs' costs on an indemnity basis summarily assessed at HK$60,000.

Citation
SINO TRIFONE LTD v. FOND EXPRESS LOGISTICS LTD AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff (respondent): SINO TRIFONE LIMITED; 1st Defendant: FOND EXPRESS LOGISTICS LIMITED; 2nd Defendant (applicant): FOND EXPRESS LOGISTICS INC.; Plaintiff (respondent): KAI MIN FASHION (HK) LIMITED
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
22 May 2013
Case Number
HCMP2366/2012
Procedural Posture
High Court of the Hong Kong SAR Court of Appeal Miscellaneous Proceedings / Hearing on Applications for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Final Appeal Following Refusal of Extension of Time
Outcome
Notices of motion dismissed; applications for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal refused
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Leave to Appeal, Indemnity Costs, Representation of a Company by a Director, Summary Assessment of Costs
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Appeal Costs Company Law Extension of Time Leave to Appeal Indemnity Costs Representation of a Company by a Director +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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SINO TRIFONE LIMITED

Plaintiff (respondent)

FOND EXPRESS LOGISTICS LIMITED

1st Defendant

FOND EXPRESS LOGISTICS INC.

2nd Defendant (applicant)

KAI MIN FASHION (HK) LIMITED

Plaintiff (respondent)

Procedural Posture

High Court of the Hong Kong SAR Court of Appeal Miscellaneous Proceedings / Hearing on Applications for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Final Appeal Following Refusal of Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the intended appeals enjoyed a real prospect of success sufficient to justify extension of time
  2. 2 Whether leave should be granted to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal from this court's discretionary refusal to extend time
  3. 3 Whether a company may be represented by a director without Registrar's leave in this court

Ratio Decidendi

The notices of motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal were dismissed because the 2nd defendant failed to show the intended appeals had a real prospect of success or raised questions of great or public importance justifying leave from a discretionary refusal to extend time; the court declined to adjourn or to permit representation by a director and ordered the 2nd defendant to pay the plaintiffs' costs on an indemnity basis summarily assessed at HK$60,000.

Court Disposition

Notices of motion dismissed; applications for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal refused

Orders

  • Notices of motion dismissed
  • 2nd defendant to pay the plaintiffs' costs of the notices of motion on an indemnity basis, summarily assessed at HK$60,000, within 7 days of judgment