LO FONG HUNG v. FUNG YUEN KWAN, VERONICA AND ANOTHER

LO FONG HUNG v. FUNG YUEN KWAN, VERONICA AND ANOTHER

The Summons for leave to intervene was dismissed because the intervention was unjustified, filed with inexcusable delay and risked derailing the Trial; the Intended Intervener failed to seek less disruptive alternatives (eg undertakings by correspondence); consequently the Intended Intervener was ordered to pay the 1st Respondent's costs of the Summons on an indemnity basis with a certificate for three counsel, taxed at HK$680,000 payable forthwith.

Citation
[2025] HKCFI 3101
Parties
Petitioner: Lo Fong Hung; 1st Respondent: Fung Yuen Kwan, Veronica; 2nd Respondent: New Bright International Development Limited; Intended Intervener: Chiu Yee Mui
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
17 July 2025
Case Number
HCMP2219/2020
Procedural Posture
Companies Petition Under Companies Ordinance (sections 723 725) / Costs Ruling on Summons to Intervene (pre Trial)
Outcome
Summons dismissed; costs awarded to 1st Respondent on indemnity basis with certificate for three counsel; costs taxed at HK$680,000 payable forthwith by Intended Intervener
Legal Topics
Intervention, Costs, Estoppel, Beneficial Ownership, Trusts, Adjournment
Source Language
EN
Company Law Civil Procedure Family Law (matrimonial Ancillary Relief) Intervention Costs Estoppel Beneficial Ownership Trusts +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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lo Fong Hung

Petitioner

Fung Yuen Kwan, Veronica

1st Respondent

New Bright International Development Limited

2nd Respondent

Chiu Yee Mui

Intended Intervener

Procedural Posture

Companies Petition Under Companies Ordinance (sections 723 725) / Costs Ruling on Summons to Intervene (pre Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Intended Intervener should be granted leave to intervene shortly before trial
  2. 2 Whether the Trial should be adjourned and further directions given
  3. 3 Whether costs should be awarded and on what basis (indemnity, certificate for three counsel)

Ratio Decidendi

The Summons for leave to intervene was dismissed because the intervention was unjustified, filed with inexcusable delay and risked derailing the Trial; the Intended Intervener failed to seek less disruptive alternatives (eg undertakings by correspondence); consequently the Intended Intervener was ordered to pay the 1st Respondent's costs of the Summons on an indemnity basis with a certificate for three counsel, taxed at HK$680,000 payable forthwith.

Court Disposition

Summons dismissed; costs awarded to 1st Respondent on indemnity basis with certificate for three counsel; costs taxed at HK$680,000 payable forthwith by Intended Intervener

Orders

  • Summons dated 13 October 2023 dismissed
  • Intended Intervener to pay the costs of and occasioned by the Summons to the 1st Respondent on an indemnity basis