LI SHIU TO v. CHEUNG PIK NG AND OTHERS

LI SHIU TO v. CHEUNG PIK NG AND OTHERS

Leave was granted because the statutory and procedural requirements for a contribution claim and joinder were met, the need for joinder arose from the amended (purple) pleadings, D1's delay was satisfactorily explained in context of the long dormancy of the action and prior procedural events, and the convenience and justice of trying all issues together outweighed the limited prejudice or delay to the plaintiff.

Citation
LI SHIU TO v. CHEUNG PIK NG AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiff: Plaintiff; 1st Defendant: Li Shiu Tsang (1st Defendant); 2nd Defendant: Li Shiu Kwan; 3rd Defendant: Li Po Chun Estates Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
10 July 2013
Case Number
HCA416/2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Claim Involving Company Shares, Estate Administration and Contribution / Interlocutory/chambers Application for Leave to Issue Third Party Notice (pre‑trial)
Outcome
Leave granted to the 1st defendant to issue a third party notice against LSK (2nd defendant).
Legal Topics
Third Party Notice, Contribution, Joinder, Delay and Prejudice, Wilful Default, Costs Summary Assessment
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Company Law Estate Administration Equity Third Party Notice Contribution Joinder Delay and Prejudice +2 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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Plaintiff

Plaintiff

Li Shiu Tsang (1st Defendant)

1st Defendant

Li Shiu Kwan

2nd Defendant

Li Po Chun Estates Limited

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Claim Involving Company Shares, Estate Administration and Contribution / Interlocutory/chambers Application for Leave to Issue Third Party Notice (pre‑trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 1st defendant should be granted leave to issue a third party notice against LSK under rules/orders and statute
  2. 2 Whether excessive delay by the 1st defendant bars joinder for prejudice to the plaintiff
  3. 3 Whether joinder would cause undue prejudice or unacceptable delay given the state of the proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was granted because the statutory and procedural requirements for a contribution claim and joinder were met, the need for joinder arose from the amended (purple) pleadings, D1's delay was satisfactorily explained in context of the long dormancy of the action and prior procedural events, and the convenience and justice of trying all issues together outweighed the limited prejudice or delay to the plaintiff.

Court Disposition

Leave granted to the 1st defendant to issue a third party notice against LSK (2nd defendant).

Orders

  • Plaintiff to serve the third party notice on LSK within 14 days (by 23 July 2013)
  • Within 14 days of LSK's acknowledgement of service plaintiff to take out a summons for directions returnable 27 August 2013 at 9:30 am (30 minutes reserved)