CHAN CHING HO,OWEN v. POON YUK KING

CHAN CHING HO,OWEN v. POON YUK KING

Leave to re-re-amend the statement of claim was granted because the proposed misrepresentation cause of action arose out of the same or substantially the same facts already pleaded and supported by an earlier witness statement, and the Rules (Order 20 r8 RDC) together with Limitation Ordinance s35(6) permit such an amendment; accordingly it was fair and just to allow the issues to go to trial.

Citation
CHAN CHING HO,OWEN v. POON YUK KING
Parties
Plaintiff: Plaintiff; Defendant: Defendant
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
12 August 2014
Case Number
DCCJ1802/2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Contract/misrepresentation / Pre Trial (application to Amend Pleadings in Chambers)
Outcome
Application to re-re-amend statement of claim granted
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Reckless Misrepresentation, Leave to Amend After Limitation, Pleading Same Facts
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Contract Tort Misrepresentation Limitation Amendment of Pleadings Fraudulent Misrepresentation Reckless Misrepresentation +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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Plaintiff

Plaintiff

Defendant

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Contract/misrepresentation / Pre Trial (application to Amend Pleadings in Chambers)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave should be granted to re-re-amend the statement of claim to add fraudulent/reckless misrepresentation
  2. 2 Whether the proposed new cause of action arises out of the same or substantially the same facts as existing pleadings
  3. 3 Whether the amendment is time‑barred or permissible under limitation rules

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to re-re-amend the statement of claim was granted because the proposed misrepresentation cause of action arose out of the same or substantially the same facts already pleaded and supported by an earlier witness statement, and the Rules (Order 20 r8 RDC) together with Limitation Ordinance s35(6) permit such an amendment; accordingly it was fair and just to allow the issues to go to trial.

Court Disposition

Application to re-re-amend statement of claim granted

Orders

  • Amendment allowed to include fraudulent and/or reckless misrepresentation as per plaintiff's latest proposed amendments
  • Order granted in terms of items 1 to 5 of the plaintiff's summons