HO KAI CHEONG AND ANOTHER v. WONG MAN YIU ANTHONY AND ANOTHER

HO KAI CHEONG AND ANOTHER v. WONG MAN YIU ANTHONY AND ANOTHER

The appeal was allowed because affidavits disclosed triable issues about the existence of the representations, the identity of parties to the agreement and the application of the funds, and because the Registrar's judgment erroneously included transactions predating any alleged agreement resulting in an incorrect sum; accordingly summary judgment was set aside and defendants granted unconditional leave to defend.

Citation
HO KAI CHEONG AND ANOTHER v. WONG MAN YIU ANTHONY AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff: Ho Kai Cheong; Plaintiff: Cheung Mui Seung Emily; 1st Defendant: Wong Man Yiu Anthony; 2nd Defendant: Leung Kan
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
7 September 1998
Case Number
HCA6922/1997
Procedural Posture
Civil Summary Judgment Appeal / Appeal From Registrar's Summary Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Registrar Betts' summary judgment set aside; defendants granted unconditional leave to defend; leave granted to plaintiffs and defendants to amend pleadings; costs awarded to defendants.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Leave to Defend, Amendment of Pleadings, Accounting of Shares, Credibility of Evidence
Source Language
EN
Contract Civil Procedure Equity Company/share Transactions Summary Judgment Leave to Defend Amendment of Pleadings Accounting of Shares +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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ho Kai Cheong

Plaintiff

Cheung Mui Seung Emily

Plaintiff

Wong Man Yiu Anthony

1st Defendant

Leung Kan

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Summary Judgment Appeal / Appeal From Registrar's Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there were triable issues that precluded summary judgment
  2. 2 Whether the 1st Defendant made representations inducing the Plaintiffs to pay $250,000
  3. 3 Whether the funds were applied to purchase shares for the Plaintiffs or mixed with family accounts

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was allowed because affidavits disclosed triable issues about the existence of the representations, the identity of parties to the agreement and the application of the funds, and because the Registrar's judgment erroneously included transactions predating any alleged agreement resulting in an incorrect sum; accordingly summary judgment was set aside and defendants granted unconditional leave to defend.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Registrar Betts' summary judgment set aside; defendants granted unconditional leave to defend; leave granted to plaintiffs and defendants to amend pleadings; costs awarded to defendants.

Orders

  • Summary judgment of Mr Registrar Betts dated 23 June 1998 set aside
  • Defendants granted unconditional leave to defend