AI ZHONG AND ANOTHER v. METROFOND LTD

AI ZHONG AND ANOTHER v. METROFOND LTD

Appeal dismissed and defendant's application for security for costs refused: the plaintiffs were not ordinarily resident in Hong Kong and, in any event, the defendant's counterclaim arose out of the same matters and positioned the defendant as a real attacker so that ordering security against the plaintiffs would be...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
AI ZHONG AND ANOTHER v. METROFOND LTD
Parties
1st Plaintiff: AI ZHONG; 2nd Plaintiff: LI NAN; Defendant: METROFOND LIMITED
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
24 November 2009
Case Number
HCA2627/2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Action Sale and Purchase; Security for Costs Application / Appeal From Master's Refusal of Security for Costs; Hearing in Chambers; Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; defendant's appeal against Master's refusal of security for costs dismissed
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Ordinary Residence, Real Attacker, Counterclaim, Misrepresentation
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Contract Property Tort (misrepresentation) Security for Costs Ordinary Residence Real Attacker Counterclaim +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 7 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AI ZHONG

1st Plaintiff

LI NAN

2nd Plaintiff

METROFOND LIMITED

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action Sale and Purchase; Security for Costs Application / Appeal From Master's Refusal of Security for Costs; Hearing in Chambers; Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiffs are ordinarily resident in Hong Kong for the purposes of Order 23, rule 1
  2. 2 Whether the court should order security for costs against the plaintiffs
  3. 3 Whether the defendant's counterclaim makes it the 'real attacker' so as to preclude security for costs

Ratio Decidendi

Appeal dismissed and defendant's application for security for costs refused: the plaintiffs were not ordinarily resident in Hong Kong and, in any event, the defendant's counterclaim arose out of the same matters and positioned the defendant as a real attacker so that ordering security against the plaintiffs would be unjust; accordingly neither party was ordered to give security and the defendant's appeal was dismissed with costs to the plaintiffs.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; defendant's appeal against Master's refusal of security for costs dismissed

Orders

  • Defendant's application for security for costs refused
  • Neither party ordered to give security for costs