CHAU MEI KIU AND ANOTHER v. THE OWNERS OF THE SAID VESSEL FEN HE ("THE SAID VESSEL") AND OTHERS

CHAU MEI KIU AND ANOTHER v. THE OWNERS OF THE SAID VESSEL FEN HE ("THE SAID VESSEL") AND OTHERS

The ex parte renewal of the writ was set aside because the plaintiffs failed to show good reason for renewal and the renewal application contained material non-disclosures (including expiry of limitation, failure to effect service and that the vessel could have been arrested earlier); costs awarded to the defendants.

Citation
CHAU MEI KIU AND ANOTHER v. THE OWNERS OF THE SAID VESSEL FEN HE ("THE SAID VESSEL") AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiffs: CHAN MEI KIU and CHEUNG KIT FUNG (Administratrice and Administrator of the estate of CHEUNG KWAI SHING, deceased); Defendants: The Owners of the Vessel FEN HE and named sisterships (defendants)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
4 October 1996
Case Number
HCAJ466/1994
Procedural Posture
Admiralty Action in Rem / Application to Set Aside Renewal of Writ; High Court Judgment Delivered
Outcome
Order of 19 December 1995 renewing the validity of the writ set aside; defendants awarded costs.
Legal Topics
In Rem Service, Renewal of Writ, Material Non Disclosure, Legal Aid Conduct, Arrest of Ship, Service of Process
Source Language
EN
Admiralty Civil Procedure Limitation In Rem Service Renewal of Writ Material Non Disclosure Legal Aid Conduct Arrest of Ship +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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CHAN MEI KIU and CHEUNG KIT FUNG (Administratrice and Administrator of the estate of CHEUNG KWAI SHING, deceased)

Plaintiffs

The Owners of the Vessel FEN HE and named sisterships (defendants)

Defendants

Procedural Posture

Admiralty Action in Rem / Application to Set Aside Renewal of Writ; High Court Judgment Delivered

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether good reason was shown to justify ex parte renewal of an in rem writ
  2. 2 Whether material non-disclosures in the ex parte renewal application vitiated the order
  3. 3 Duty of plaintiffs and their solicitors to effect service promptly in in rem proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The ex parte renewal of the writ was set aside because the plaintiffs failed to show good reason for renewal and the renewal application contained material non-disclosures (including expiry of limitation, failure to effect service and that the vessel could have been arrested earlier); costs awarded to the defendants.

Court Disposition

Order of 19 December 1995 renewing the validity of the writ set aside; defendants awarded costs.

Orders

  • Order dated 19 December 1995 renewing the validity of the writ is set aside.
  • Defendants to have the costs of this application.