WING ON CHEONG HOLDING LTD. AND OTHERS v. LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND OTHERS

WING ON CHEONG HOLDING LTD. AND OTHERS v. LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND OTHERS

The court construed Master Chu's unless order as a time order; the plaintiffs filed and served detailed answers by the deadline which were made in good faith and not illusory; insufficiency of particulars does not amount to default under an unless order and is a matter for a further application, therefore the defendants' appeal to strike out was dismissed.

Citation
WING ON CHEONG HOLDING LTD. AND OTHERS v. LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND OTHERS
Parties
1st Plaintiff: WING ON CHEONG HOLDING LIMITED; 2nd Plaintiff: WING ON CHEONG AUCTIONERRS & ESTATE AGENCY LTD.; 3rd Plaintiff: WING ON CHEONG WATCH INDUSTRIES LTD.; 1st Defendant: LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION; 2nd Defendant: VIBRO (H.K.) LIMITED; 3rd Defendant: HIP HING CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
20 May 1998
Case Number
HCA11980/1996
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From Interlocutory Application / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Further and Better Particulars, Unless Order, Striking Out for Non Compliance, Sufficiency Vs Timeliness of Compliance, Rylands V. Fletcher
Source Language
EN
Contract Tort Negligence Nuisance Procedural Law Construction Law Further and Better Particulars Unless Order +3 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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

WING ON CHEONG HOLDING LIMITED

1st Plaintiff

WING ON CHEONG AUCTIONERRS & ESTATE AGENCY LTD.

2nd Plaintiff

WING ON CHEONG WATCH INDUSTRIES LTD.

3rd Plaintiff

LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

1st Defendant

VIBRO (H.K.) LIMITED

2nd Defendant

HIP HING CONSTRUCTION COMPANY

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From Interlocutory Application / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs breached the unless order by failing to deliver adequate answers to requests for further and better particulars
  2. 2 Whether any breach justified striking out the plaintiffs' claim
  3. 3 Proper construction of an unless order as to whether it addresses timeliness or sufficiency of compliance

Ratio Decidendi

The court construed Master Chu's unless order as a time order; the plaintiffs filed and served detailed answers by the deadline which were made in good faith and not illusory; insufficiency of particulars does not amount to default under an unless order and is a matter for a further application, therefore the defendants' appeal to strike out was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs to the Plaintiffs