GLYNHILL INTERNATIONAL LTD v. BELFORD PACIFIC LTD AND ANOTHER

GLYNHILL INTERNATIONAL LTD v. BELFORD PACIFIC LTD AND ANOTHER

Application dismissed because the Third Party conceded inordinate delay and failed to demonstrate a real prospect of success; the court found the past consideration argument unpersuasive given the pleaded agreement as a single transaction and continuing liability and contemporaneous documents undermining the Third...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
GLYNHILL INTERNATIONAL LTD v. BELFORD PACIFIC LTD AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff: GLYNHILL INTERNATIONAL LIMITED; 1st Defendant: BELFORD PACIFIC LIMTIED; 2nd Defendant: TSE WAN CHUNG PHILIP; Third Party: CHAU HONG MING PETER
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
12 January 2009
Case Number
HCA2937/2002
Procedural Posture
Application to Set Aside Judgment (civil) / Chambers Hearing; Decision on Application to Set Aside Judgment and Extension of Time
Outcome
Application to set aside judgment and extension of time refused; costs awarded to 2nd Defendant
Legal Topics
Setting Aside Judgment, Service of Documents, Past Consideration, Extension of Time, Summary Judgment, Statutory Demand
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Contract Law Enforcement (statutory Demand) Setting Aside Judgment Service of Documents Past Consideration Extension of Time Summary Judgment +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

GLYNHILL INTERNATIONAL LIMITED

Plaintiff

BELFORD PACIFIC LIMTIED

1st Defendant

TSE WAN CHUNG PHILIP

2nd Defendant

CHAU HONG MING PETER

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Application to Set Aside Judgment (civil) / Chambers Hearing; Decision on Application to Set Aside Judgment and Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a regularly obtained judgment should be set aside
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has a real prospect of success at trial
  3. 3 Whether delay is inordinate and whether merits can outweigh delay

Ratio Decidendi

Application dismissed because the Third Party conceded inordinate delay and failed to demonstrate a real prospect of success; the court found the past consideration argument unpersuasive given the pleaded agreement as a single transaction and continuing liability and contemporaneous documents undermining the Third Party's account.

Court Disposition

Application to set aside judgment and extension of time refused; costs awarded to 2nd Defendant

Orders

  • Application to set aside the judgment dismissed
  • Application for extension of time to file the application dismissed