NG YAT CHI AND ANOTHER v. CHINA RESOURCES (HOLDINGS) CO LTD AND OTHERS

NG YAT CHI AND ANOTHER v. CHINA RESOURCES (HOLDINGS) CO LTD AND OTHERS

Master Ho properly exercised his discretion under Order 32 Rule 12 in referring the matters to the designated judge. Case management required that the gagging order proceedings be dealt with first to prevent waste of costs and judicial resources; therefore the appeal against the referral is dismissed and the stay/directions contemplated by the designated judge (directions (j) and (k)) should be made and enforced pending determination of the gagging order proceedings.

Citation
NG YAT CHI AND ANOTHER v. CHINA RESOURCES (HOLDINGS) CO LTD AND OTHERS
Parties
1st Plaintiff: NG Yat Chi; 2nd Plaintiff: CHOY Bing Wing; 1st Defendant: China Resources (Holdings) Company Limited; 2nd Defendant: Max Share Limited; 3rd Defendant: China Resources Enterprises Limited (Stock Code 291); 4th Defendant: Securities and Futures Commission
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
13 May 2005
Case Number
HCA424/2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Interlocutory (gagging Order / Striking Out Applications) / Decision in Chambers on Appeal Against Master\'s Referral Order and Case Management Directions
Outcome
Appeal dismissed. Master Ho\'s referral to the designated judge upheld. Directions for stay pending gagging order proceedings made. Costs orders nisi made.
Legal Topics
Gagging Order, Vexatious Litigant, Stay of Proceedings, Striking Out, Referral to Designated Judge
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Court Case Management Judicial Administration Vexatious Litigant Law Access to Courts Gagging Order Vexatious Litigant Stay of Proceedings +2 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 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

NG Yat Chi

1st Plaintiff

CHOY Bing Wing

2nd Plaintiff

China Resources (Holdings) Company Limited

1st Defendant

Max Share Limited

2nd Defendant

China Resources Enterprises Limited (Stock Code 291)

3rd Defendant

Securities and Futures Commission

4th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Interlocutory (gagging Order / Striking Out Applications) / Decision in Chambers on Appeal Against Master\'s Referral Order and Case Management Directions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Master Ho properly referred the proceedings to the designated judge under Order 32 Rule 12
  2. 2 Whether the Court of Final Appeal (CFA) gagging order binds the 2nd Plaintiff who was not a party to FACV No.5 of 2004
  3. 3 Whether the gagging order proceedings should be determined before other steps in this action (case management)

Ratio Decidendi

Master Ho properly exercised his discretion under Order 32 Rule 12 in referring the matters to the designated judge. Case management required that the gagging order proceedings be dealt with first to prevent waste of costs and judicial resources; therefore the appeal against the referral is dismissed and the stay/directions contemplated by the designated judge (directions (j) and (k)) should be made and enforced pending determination of the gagging order proceedings.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed. Master Ho\'s referral to the designated judge upheld. Directions for stay pending gagging order proceedings made. Costs orders nisi made.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Order nisi that the 2nd Plaintiff pay the costs of the 4th Defendant in respect of the appeal