MASTER NATION LTD v. 何美媛 AND ANOTHER

MASTER NATION LTD v. 何美媛 AND ANOTHER

The court found the plaintiff and its agent knew the 1st defendant's identity prior to issuing the originating summons, intentionally failed to disclose her identity to obtain a speedy default possession judgment, and that service/posting as asserted was not proved; accordingly the possession order and writ were irregularly obtained and were set aside, with costs awarded to the 1st defendant on a full indemnity basis and directions given for continuation of proceedings.

Citation
MASTER NATION LTD v. 何美媛 AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff: Master Nation Limited; 1st Defendant: Madam Ho; 2nd Defendant: 2nd Defendant
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
19 May 2015
Case Number
DCMP2526/2014
Procedural Posture
Possession (landlord and Tenant) / Application to Set Aside Default Possession Orders (interlocutory)
Outcome
Orders set aside; proceedings to continue as directed; costs ordered to 1st defendant on full indemnity basis (nisi)
Legal Topics
Service of Process, Setting Aside Default Judgment, Possession Order, Costs
Source Language
EN
Landlord and Tenant Property Civil Procedure Possession Service of Process Setting Aside Default Judgment Possession Order Costs

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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Master Nation Limited

Plaintiff

Madam Ho

1st Defendant

2nd Defendant

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Possession (landlord and Tenant) / Application to Set Aside Default Possession Orders (interlocutory)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the possession orders were irregularly obtained by failing to name the occupier
  2. 2 Whether the originating summons and related documents were properly served or posted
  3. 3 Whether costs should be awarded on full indemnity basis

Ratio Decidendi

The court found the plaintiff and its agent knew the 1st defendant's identity prior to issuing the originating summons, intentionally failed to disclose her identity to obtain a speedy default possession judgment, and that service/posting as asserted was not proved; accordingly the possession order and writ were irregularly obtained and were set aside, with costs awarded to the 1st defendant on a full indemnity basis and directions given for continuation of proceedings.

Court Disposition

Orders set aside; proceedings to continue as directed; costs ordered to 1st defendant on full indemnity basis (nisi)

Orders

  • Order for possession dated 27 October 2014 set aside
  • Writ of possession dated 24 December 2014 set aside