MILLION (FAR EAST) LTD v. MANLEY BEST (INTERNATIONAL) FOOD LTD AND ANOTHER

MILLION (FAR EAST) LTD v. MANLEY BEST (INTERNATIONAL) FOOD LTD AND ANOTHER

The court confirmed the judgment order was a dismissal of the relevant summons and allocated costs according to that outcome: the Plaintiff is entitled to costs as against the 1st Defendant for the Plaintiff's application to the extent of its success against D1; the 2nd Defendant is entitled to costs of the Plaintiff's application where the Court ought to have granted leave to defend or dismissed that part affecting D2, with costs in the cause between P and D2 accordingly.

Citation
[2018] HKCFI 2635
Parties
Plaintiff: Plaintiff (P); 1st Defendant: 1st Defendant (D1); 2nd Defendant: 2nd Defendant (D2)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
30 November 2018
Case Number
HCA2429/2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Summary Judgment Application / Decision on Costs
Outcome
Dismissal of the relevant summons and allocation of costs as per the judgment.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Leave to Defend, Equitable Mortgage, Conditional Agreement Defence
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Costs Summary Judgment Leave to Defend Equitable Mortgage Conditional Agreement Defence

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Plaintiff (P)

Plaintiff

1st Defendant (D1)

1st Defendant

2nd Defendant (D2)

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Summary Judgment Application / Decision on Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether unconditional leave to defend should have been granted to the 2nd Defendant
  2. 2 Whether costs should follow dismissal or be apportioned where plaintiff succeeded only against one defendant
  3. 3 Whether the conditional agreement defence and equitable mortgage contention were arguable and fact-sensitive

Ratio Decidendi

The court confirmed the judgment order was a dismissal of the relevant summons and allocated costs according to that outcome: the Plaintiff is entitled to costs as against the 1st Defendant for the Plaintiff's application to the extent of its success against D1; the 2nd Defendant is entitled to costs of the Plaintiff's application where the Court ought to have granted leave to defend or dismissed that part affecting D2, with costs in the cause between P and D2 accordingly.

Court Disposition

Dismissal of the relevant summons and allocation of costs as per the judgment.

Orders

  • Dismissal of the relevant summons.
  • Plaintiff awarded costs of its application against the 1st Defendant to the extent of its success against D1 (apportioned where appropriate).