NG SIU LAN v. INCON TRADING CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER

NG SIU LAN v. INCON TRADING CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER

The Master was correct to grant summary judgment against the 1st Defendant because the 1st Defendant did not demonstrate any arguable defence in light of contemporaneous documents and the credibility findings; the 2nd Defendant's allegations were incredible and, rather than unconditional leave, the proper remedy is conditional leave to defend upon payment into court of the claimed sum (US$2,309,028.52) within 14 days, failing which judgment will enter against him.

Citation
NG SIU LAN v. INCON TRADING CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff: Ng Siu Lan; 1st Defendant: Incon Trading Co. Ltd; 2nd Defendant: Ng Pak Wong
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
13 March 2000
Case Number
HCA13497/1999
Procedural Posture
Civil Action Contract/debt (loan Recovery) / Appeal From Master Lung's Order on an Order 14 Summary Judgment Application; Hearing on Leave to Defend and Conditional Payment Into Court
Outcome
Appeal by 1st Defendant dismissed; appeal against Master\u2019s grant of unconditional leave to 2nd Defendant allowed; unconditional leave set aside and substituted with conditional leave requiring payment into court of US$2,309,028.52 within 14 days; in default judgment for Plaintiff against 2nd Defendant in terms...
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Leave to Defend, Payment Into Court, Agency/third Party Payment, Forgery Allegation, Documentary Evidence, Director's Liability
Source Language
EN
Contract Civil Procedure Debt Recovery Evidence Summary Judgment Leave to Defend Payment Into Court Agency/third Party Payment +3 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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ng Siu Lan

Plaintiff

Incon Trading Co. Ltd

1st Defendant

Ng Pak Wong

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action Contract/debt (loan Recovery) / Appeal From Master Lung's Order on an Order 14 Summary Judgment Application; Hearing on Leave to Defend and Conditional Payment Into Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 1st Defendant received the RMB19,000,000 loan and is liable to repay
  2. 2 Whether the 2nd Defendant has an arguable defence to the Plaintiff's claim and whether leave to defend should be unconditional
  3. 3 Whether signatures and documentary evidence are forged or unreliable

Ratio Decidendi

The Master was correct to grant summary judgment against the 1st Defendant because the 1st Defendant did not demonstrate any arguable defence in light of contemporaneous documents and the credibility findings; the 2nd Defendant's allegations were incredible and, rather than unconditional leave, the proper remedy is conditional leave to defend upon payment into court of the claimed sum (US$2,309,028.52) within 14 days, failing which judgment will enter against him.

Court Disposition

Appeal by 1st Defendant dismissed; appeal against Master\u2019s grant of unconditional leave to 2nd Defendant allowed; unconditional leave set aside and substituted with conditional leave requiring payment into court of US$2,309,028.52 within 14 days; in default judgment for Plaintiff against 2nd Defendant in terms...

Orders

  • Appeal by 1st Defendant dismissed
  • Master's order granting unconditional leave to the 2nd Defendant to defend set aside