MTR CORPORATION LTD v. CHINA LUCK ENTERPRISES LTD AND OTHERS

MTR CORPORATION LTD v. CHINA LUCK ENTERPRISES LTD AND OTHERS

The appeal was allowed and summary judgment set aside against the 3rd defendant because there is a real and compact triable issue whether the Surety Deed signature is forged, the 3rd defendant's affidavit evidence warranted testing at trial, and the interests of justice justified extending time to appeal;...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] HKCFI 790
Parties
Plaintiff: MTR CORPORATION LIMITED; 1st Defendant: CHINA LUCK ENTERPRISES LIMITED; 2nd Defendant: CHEUNG SAU YAN CARINA; 3rd Defendant: WILLIAM CHAN
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
13 March 2024
Case Number
HCA1633/2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Action for Breach of Tenancy / Guarantor Liability / Appeal Against Summary Judgment (leave to Defend Granted)
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; summary judgment set aside as against the 3rd defendant (William Chan); unconditional leave to defend granted to the 3rd defendant; summary judgment remains in effect as against China Luck and Cheung.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Surety Deed, Forgery of Signature, Leave to Defend, Extension of Time to Appeal, Damages Assessment
Source Language
en
Contract Civil Procedure Suretyship Forgery Landlord and Tenant Summary Judgment Surety Deed Forgery of Signature +3 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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MTR CORPORATION LIMITED

Plaintiff

CHINA LUCK ENTERPRISES LIMITED

1st Defendant

CHEUNG SAU YAN CARINA

2nd Defendant

WILLIAM CHAN

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action for Breach of Tenancy / Guarantor Liability / Appeal Against Summary Judgment (leave to Defend Granted)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Surety Deed was signed by the 3rd defendant or forged
  2. 2 Whether the appeal out of time should be allowed
  3. 3 Whether summary judgment was appropriate given allegations of forgery and new evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was allowed and summary judgment set aside against the 3rd defendant because there is a real and compact triable issue whether the Surety Deed signature is forged, the 3rd defendant's affidavit evidence warranted testing at trial, and the interests of justice justified extending time to appeal; unconditional leave to defend was therefore granted.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; summary judgment set aside as against the 3rd defendant (William Chan); unconditional leave to defend granted to the 3rd defendant; summary judgment remains in effect as against China Luck and Cheung.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal out of time granted
  • Appeal allowed