LAM HEI SHING JOSEPH v. 郭達標 AND OTHERS

LAM HEI SHING JOSEPH v. 郭達標 AND OTHERS

The amended summons for summary declarations under O.14 and for a summary determination under O.14A was dismissed because there are disputed facts surrounding the execution and aftermath of the four deeds that raise triable issues, and the totality of the facts (including access to justice and common interest considerations) must be examined at trial; accordingly summary relief and O.14A determination were inappropriate.

Citation
LAM HEI SHING JOSEPH v. 郭達標 AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiff: Plaintiff; 1st Defendant: D1; 2nd Defendant: D2 (BVI company); 3rd Defendant: Barnet Consultants Limited (D3)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
11 June 2008
Case Number
HCA697/2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Claim Application for Summary Judgment and Summary Determination (o.14 and O.14 A) / Interlocutory Judgment on Amended Summons Refusing Summary Relief and O.14 a Determination
Outcome
Amended summons dismissed; application for summary judgment under O.14 and summary determination under O.14A refused
Legal Topics
Maintenance, Champerty, Summary Judgment, O.14, O.14 a, Misrepresentation, Interference With Settlement, Access to Justice, Trusts (deeds)
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Contract Tort Public Policy Maintenance Champerty Summary Judgment +6 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 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Plaintiff

Plaintiff

D1

1st Defendant

D2 (BVI company)

2nd Defendant

Barnet Consultants Limited (D3)

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Claim Application for Summary Judgment and Summary Determination (o.14 and O.14 A) / Interlocutory Judgment on Amended Summons Refusing Summary Relief and O.14 a Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the four deeds constituted unlawful maintenance and/or champerty and were therefore illegal and unenforceable
  2. 2 Whether summary judgment under O.14 was appropriate on the disputed facts
  3. 3 Whether the issue should be determined summarily under O.14A rather than at trial

Ratio Decidendi

The amended summons for summary declarations under O.14 and for a summary determination under O.14A was dismissed because there are disputed facts surrounding the execution and aftermath of the four deeds that raise triable issues, and the totality of the facts (including access to justice and common interest considerations) must be examined at trial; accordingly summary relief and O.14A determination were inappropriate.

Court Disposition

Amended summons dismissed; application for summary judgment under O.14 and summary determination under O.14A refused

Orders

  • The defendants are entitled to their costs of the amended summons
  • Order nisi that costs of the application be costs to the defendants