PACIFIC DUNLOP GARMENTS LTD v. FUNDAMENTAL GLOBAL LTD AND OTHERS

PACIFIC DUNLOP GARMENTS LTD v. FUNDAMENTAL GLOBAL LTD AND OTHERS

Adjournment was properly granted and a trial de novo ordered because plaintiff's counsel was unable to continue, the court would not compel disclosure of the reason absent demonstrated prejudice, and any prejudice to defendants could be compensated by indemnity costs; accordingly the plaintiff must pay costs of and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
PACIFIC DUNLOP GARMENTS LTD v. FUNDAMENTAL GLOBAL LTD AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiff: Plaintiff; 1st Defendant: ED; 2nd Defendant: GAIN-PLUS HOLDINGS LIMITED; 3rd Defendant: CHALLENGE GLOBAL LIMITED; 4th Defendant: KYLIN PROSPER LIMITED
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
13 August 2012
Case Number
HCA1655/2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Trial Adjournment Application
Outcome
Application to adjourn granted; order for trial de novo; plaintiff ordered to pay indemnity costs; speedy trial directed.
Legal Topics
Adjournment, Indemnity Costs, Trial De Novo, Speedy Trial
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Costs Adjournment Indemnity Costs Trial De Novo Speedy Trial

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Plaintiff

Plaintiff

ED

1st Defendant

GAIN-PLUS HOLDINGS LIMITED

2nd Defendant

CHALLENGE GLOBAL LIMITED

3rd Defendant

KYLIN PROSPER LIMITED

4th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Trial Adjournment Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant adjournment when counsel for plaintiff declares inability to continue
  2. 2 Whether trial should be ordered de novo
  3. 3 Whether plaintiff should pay indemnity costs for adjournment

Ratio Decidendi

Adjournment was properly granted and a trial de novo ordered because plaintiff's counsel was unable to continue, the court would not compel disclosure of the reason absent demonstrated prejudice, and any prejudice to defendants could be compensated by indemnity costs; accordingly the plaintiff must pay costs of and occasioned by the adjournment on an indemnity basis to be taxed if not agreed.

Court Disposition

Application to adjourn granted; order for trial de novo; plaintiff ordered to pay indemnity costs; speedy trial directed.

Orders

  • Adjournment granted and trial ordered de novo; parties to obtain fresh trial dates.
  • Costs of and occasioned by the adjournment to be paid forthwith by the plaintiff on an indemnity basis and to be taxed if not agreed.