AU WING LUN v. TAM MEI KAM AND OTHERS

AU WING LUN v. TAM MEI KAM AND OTHERS

The injunctions were refused: the court will not compel a former client to re-instruct a solicitor or specifically enforce a personal service retainer where trust and confidence have irretrievably broken down; the factual basis for the security injunction no longer existed and there was no proper foundation for a court-ordered mental health examination.

Citation
AU WING LUN v. TAM MEI KAM AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiff (consultant of Messrs Kong & Associates): Au Wing Lun; 1st Defendant (mother): Tam Mei Kam; 2nd Defendant (brother): Mui Kai Ming Peter; 3rd Defendant (solicitor Firm): Lau & Chan, Solicitors
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
13 July 2007
Case Number
HCA811/2007
Procedural Posture
Chamber Application for Interim Injunctions Arising From Probate Proceedings / Hearing and Decision on Injunction Application; Interlocutory Directions for Striking Out Applications
Outcome
Injunction application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Interim Injunction, Specific Performance of Personal Service Contract, Change of Solicitors, Striking Out, Mental Capacity Examination, Indemnity Costs
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Probate and Wills Solicitor Client Relations Equity and Trusts Costs Interim Injunction Specific Performance of Personal Service Contract Change of Solicitors +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 5 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Au Wing Lun

Plaintiff (consultant of Messrs Kong & Associates)

Tam Mei Kam

1st Defendant (mother)

Mui Kai Ming Peter

2nd Defendant (brother)

Lau & Chan, Solicitors

3rd Defendant (solicitor Firm)

Procedural Posture

Chamber Application for Interim Injunctions Arising From Probate Proceedings / Hearing and Decision on Injunction Application; Interlocutory Directions for Striking Out Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether court can compel a former client to re-instruct a solicitor
  2. 2 Whether a contract for personal service (retainer) can be specifically enforced
  3. 3 Whether a prohibitive injunction can restrain a client from changing solicitors

Ratio Decidendi

The injunctions were refused: the court will not compel a former client to re-instruct a solicitor or specifically enforce a personal service retainer where trust and confidence have irretrievably broken down; the factual basis for the security injunction no longer existed and there was no proper foundation for a court-ordered mental health examination.

Court Disposition

Injunction application dismissed.

Orders

  • Injunction application dismissed.
  • Costs awarded against the Plaintiff on an indemnity basis, taxed if not agreed, to be paid forthwith.