VELATEL GLOBAL COMMUNICATIONS INC AND ANOTHER v. CHINACOMM LTD AND OTHERS

VELATEL GLOBAL COMMUNICATIONS INC AND ANOTHER v. CHINACOMM LTD AND OTHERS

The summons to vacate trial dates was dismissed because the applicant failed to provide credible first‑hand or documentary evidence of unavailability, delayed informing his solicitors, did not attempt available alternatives such as video‑link or letters of request, and the adjournment would cause substantial prejudice to the plaintiffs given the significant sums at stake and prior findings of dissipation; consequently leave to adduce a new witness statement was refused and costs were awarded to the plaintiffs.

Citation
VELATEL GLOBAL COMMUNICATIONS INC AND ANOTHER v. CHINACOMM LTD AND OTHERS
Parties
1st Plaintiff: Velatel Global Communications Inc; 2nd Plaintiff: Trussnet Capital Partners (HK) Ltd; 1st Defendant: Chinacomm Limited; 2nd Defendant: Thrive Century International Limited; 3rd Defendant: Newtop Holdings Limited; 4th Defendant: Smart Channel Development Limited; Defendant: Mong Sin; Defendant (d6): Qiu Ping; Defendant: Yuan Yig; Defendant: CECT Chinacomm Communications Co Ltd; Defendant: CECT Chinacomm Shanghai Co Ltd; Defendant: Feng Xiao Ming
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
22 March 2016
Case Number
HCA1978/2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Breach of Contract and Related Reliefs / Pre Trial Review (application to Vacate Trial Dates)
Outcome
Summons dismissed
Legal Topics
Adjournment, Vacating Trial Dates, Mareva Injunction, Witness Availability, Video Link, Costs
Source Language
EN
Contract Civil Procedure Injunction Evidence Adjournment Vacating Trial Dates Mareva Injunction Witness Availability +2 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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Velatel Global Communications Inc

1st Plaintiff

Trussnet Capital Partners (HK) Ltd

2nd Plaintiff

Chinacomm Limited

1st Defendant

Thrive Century International Limited

2nd Defendant

Newtop Holdings Limited

3rd Defendant

Smart Channel Development Limited

4th Defendant

Mong Sin

Defendant

Qiu Ping

Defendant (d6)

Yuan Yig

Defendant

CECT Chinacomm Communications Co Ltd

Defendant

CECT Chinacomm Shanghai Co Ltd

Defendant

Feng Xiao Ming

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Breach of Contract and Related Reliefs / Pre Trial Review (application to Vacate Trial Dates)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether trial dates should be vacated due to defendant's detention in Mainland criminal proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the applicant provided credible first‑hand or documentary evidence of unavailability
  3. 3 Whether alternative means (video link/letter of request) were explored or available

Ratio Decidendi

The summons to vacate trial dates was dismissed because the applicant failed to provide credible first‑hand or documentary evidence of unavailability, delayed informing his solicitors, did not attempt available alternatives such as video‑link or letters of request, and the adjournment would cause substantial prejudice to the plaintiffs given the significant sums at stake and prior findings of dissipation; consequently leave to adduce a new witness statement was refused and costs were awarded to the plaintiffs.

Court Disposition

Summons dismissed

Orders

  • Summons dated 18 February 2016 dismissed
  • No leave granted to adduce the new witness statement of Li Hong Ji