TUNG FAI v. WEI DONG

TUNG FAI v. WEI DONG

The court exercised its case-management discretion to refuse leave for the proposed third/supplemental witness statements of Wei Dong and Yao Juan because the additional material was repetitive, offered little or no probative value on the central issue (existence of the Oral Agreement), contained inadmissible...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
TUNG FAI v. WEI DONG
Parties
Plaintiff (hca 1062/2013): Million Decade Limited; Defendant (hca 1062/2013); Plaintiff (hca 1660/2013): Tung Fai; Defendant (hca 1660/2013): Wei Dong; Plaintiff (hca 1063/2013): Top Ample Ltd; Witness / Affiliated Party: Yao Juan
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
15 September 2015
Case Number
HCA1660/2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Contractual Disputes and Related Claims / Interlocutory Applications Resolved Pre Trial (case Management)
Outcome
Mixed: summonses for third witness statements by Wei Dong and Yao Juan in HCA 1062/2013 dismissed; Wei Yaos witness statement allowed; amendment of Defence in HCA 1660/2013 allowed; costs apportioned and case management directions given.
Legal Topics
Oral Agreement, Supplemental Witness Statements, Amendment of Pleadings, Leave to Adduce Evidence, Costs and Case Management
Source Language
en
Contract Law Civil Procedure Company/director Matters Evidence Law Oral Agreement Supplemental Witness Statements Amendment of Pleadings Leave to Adduce Evidence +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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Million Decade Limited

Plaintiff (hca 1062/2013)

Tung Fai

Defendant (hca 1062/2013); Plaintiff (hca 1660/2013)

Wei Dong

Defendant (hca 1660/2013)

Top Ample Ltd

Plaintiff (hca 1063/2013)

Yao Juan

Witness / Affiliated Party

Procedural Posture

Civil Contractual Disputes and Related Claims / Interlocutory Applications Resolved Pre Trial (case Management)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an alleged Oral Agreement replacing the written Cooperation Agreement existed
  2. 2 Whether leave should be granted to file and serve third/supplemental witness statements (Wei Dong and Yao Juan)
  3. 3 Whether the amended defence in HCA 1660/2013 should be permitted

Ratio Decidendi

The court exercised its case-management discretion to refuse leave for the proposed third/supplemental witness statements of Wei Dong and Yao Juan because the additional material was repetitive, offered little or no probative value on the central issue (existence of the Oral Agreement), contained inadmissible opinion and risked unnecessary cost and delay; it allowed Wei Yaos witness statement as corroborative; and it permitted the defendants proposed amendment to the Defence in HCA 1660/2013 as a legitimate alternative pleading not causing unfair prejudice.

Court Disposition

Mixed: summonses for third witness statements by Wei Dong and Yao Juan in HCA 1062/2013 dismissed; Wei Yaos witness statement allowed; amendment of Defence in HCA 1660/2013 allowed; costs apportioned and case management directions given.

Orders

  • The plaintiffs summonses in HCA 1062 of 2013 for the third witness statements be dismissed and the witness statement of Wei Yao be allowed
  • The defendants summons for amendment of the Defence in HCA 1660/2013 be allowed