CHU SHU HO DAVID AND ANOTHER v. LAM HON LIT HARRY

CHU SHU HO DAVID AND ANOTHER v. LAM HON LIT HARRY

Burrell J's order was inter partes because the defendant had notice and opportunity to be heard; another judge lacked jurisdiction to set aside or discharge that inter partes order; the duty judge properly continued the order restraining presentation of a winding-up petition outside Hong Kong to prevent...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
CHU SHU HO DAVID AND ANOTHER v. LAM HON LIT HARRY
Parties
1st Plaintiff: CHU SHU HO DAVID (also known as CHU SHU HO); 2nd Plaintiff: MISSION HILLS GOLF CLUB LIMITED; Defendant: LAM HON LIT HARRY
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
27 September 2002
Case Number
HCA3618/2002
Procedural Posture
Civil (interim Injunction / Winding Up Petition) / Summons Day / Interlocutory Stage
Outcome
Defendant's application to set aside/discharge Burrell J's order refused; plaintiffs' applications granted: continuation of the interim (2nd parte) order and consolidation of actions; HCA3525 to stand as leading action.
Legal Topics
Interim Injunction, Winding Up Petition, Ex Parte Vs Inter Partes, Consolidation, Jurisdiction to Review Interlocutory Orders
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Company Law Injunctions Insolvency Interim Injunction Winding Up Petition Ex Parte Vs Inter Partes Consolidation +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 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CHU SHU HO DAVID (also known as CHU SHU HO)

1st Plaintiff

MISSION HILLS GOLF CLUB LIMITED

2nd Plaintiff

LAM HON LIT HARRY

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (interim Injunction / Winding Up Petition) / Summons Day / Interlocutory Stage

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Burrell J's order was inter partes or ex parte
  2. 2 Whether another judge could set aside/discharge an inter partes order made by Burrell J
  3. 3 Whether to continue an order restraining presentation of a winding-up petition outside Hong Kong (BVI)

Ratio Decidendi

Burrell J's order was inter partes because the defendant had notice and opportunity to be heard; another judge lacked jurisdiction to set aside or discharge that inter partes order; the duty judge properly continued the order restraining presentation of a winding-up petition outside Hong Kong to prevent circumvention pending the interlocutory hearing; the two actions were consolidated with HCA3525 as lead action.

Court Disposition

Defendant's application to set aside/discharge Burrell J's order refused; plaintiffs' applications granted: continuation of the interim (2nd parte) order and consolidation of actions; HCA3525 to stand as leading action.

Orders

  • Defendant's application to set aside/discharge Burrell J's order refused
  • The 2nd parte (ex parte) order restraining presentation of a winding-up petition is continued pending determination of the interlocutory summons in HCA3525