P v. D1 AND ANOTHER

P v. D1 AND ANOTHER

The court directed the part‑heard trial to resume on specified dates, refused to give D1 a blank permission to amend pleadings or to adduce expert evidence and required any application for expert evidence to be made by summons with supporting affirmation by 15 September 2025 or be barred; the court ordered that interlocutory applications between now and the resumed trial be disposed of on paper and fixed the sequence and time limits for resumed trial evidence and cross‑examination; costs were reserved for later determination.

Citation
[2025] HKDC 1496
Parties
Plaintiff: P; 1st Defendant: D1; 2nd Defendant: D2
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
29 August 2025
Case Number
DCCJ811/2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Action (part‑heard Trial) / Further Directions Hearing; Part‑heard Trial to Resume 8, 9, 10 and 13 October 2025
Outcome
Part‑heard trial to resume; interlocutory applications to be decided on paper; D1 barred from adducing expert evidence unless summons with supporting affirmation filed by 15 September 2025; procedural orders for evidence and submissions; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Applications, Amendment of Pleadings, Expert Evidence, Cross Examination, Costs, Remote Case Management (order 1 a Rule 4(2)(j))
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Evidence Case Management Interlocutory Applications Amendment of Pleadings Expert Evidence Cross Examination Costs +1 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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

P

Plaintiff

D1

1st Defendant

D2

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action (part‑heard Trial) / Further Directions Hearing; Part‑heard Trial to Resume 8, 9, 10 and 13 October 2025

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether D1 should be permitted to amend pleadings without a formal summons and supporting affirmation
  2. 2 Whether D1 should have leave to adduce fresh expert evidence and the procedural preconditions for that
  3. 3 Whether future interlocutory applications should be decided on paper

Ratio Decidendi

The court directed the part‑heard trial to resume on specified dates, refused to give D1 a blank permission to amend pleadings or to adduce expert evidence and required any application for expert evidence to be made by summons with supporting affirmation by 15 September 2025 or be barred; the court ordered that interlocutory applications between now and the resumed trial be disposed of on paper and fixed the sequence and time limits for resumed trial evidence and cross‑examination; costs were reserved for later determination.

Court Disposition

Part‑heard trial to resume; interlocutory applications to be decided on paper; D1 barred from adducing expert evidence unless summons with supporting affirmation filed by 15 September 2025; procedural orders for evidence and submissions; costs reserved.

Orders

  • The part‑heard trial shall resume before DDJ Kenneth KY Lam at 9:30 a.m. on 8 October 2025 with 9, 10 and 13 October 2025 also reserved.
  • Unless this Court directs otherwise, future interlocutory applications to be made by any party between today and the Resumed Trial shall be substantively disposed of by DDJ Kenneth KY Lam on paper without any hearing.