CHENG MAN YAU v. WAH SING TRAVEL SERVICE LTD.

CHENG MAN YAU v. WAH SING TRAVEL SERVICE LTD.

The appeal is allowed because there are real disputes of fact about alleged cash payment and remittance that justify permitting the Defendant to defend, but because the defence is tenuous the court will grant leave to defend only on condition that the Defendant pays the disputed sum into court (HK$260,000 within 14 days); failure to comply will result in dismissal of the appeal with costs.

Citation
CHENG MAN YAU v. WAH SING TRAVEL SERVICE LTD.
Parties
Plaintiff: Plaintiff; Defendant: Defendant; Shareholder and Director of Defendant: Cheng Kin Ping
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
22 February 2001
Case Number
HCA17724/1999
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal Against Summary Judgment / Appeal to High Court in Chambers From Master's Summary Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; order of Master C B Chan set aside; leave granted to Defendant to defend conditional on payment into court of HK$260,000 within 14 days; if Defendant fails to pay the condition, the appeal will be dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Mistake, Failure of Consideration, Running Accounts, Payment Into Court, Leave to Defend
Source Language
EN
Contract Civil Procedure Equitable/conscience Remedies Banking/financial Transactions Summary Judgment Mistake Failure of Consideration Running Accounts +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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Plaintiff

Plaintiff

Defendant

Defendant

Cheng Kin Ping

Shareholder and Director of Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal Against Summary Judgment / Appeal to High Court in Chambers From Master's Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the summary judgment should be set aside to allow Defendant to defend
  2. 2 Whether the cheque was issued as a result of mistake and there was total failure of consideration
  3. 3 Whether there is sufficient evidence to resist summary judgment

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is allowed because there are real disputes of fact about alleged cash payment and remittance that justify permitting the Defendant to defend, but because the defence is tenuous the court will grant leave to defend only on condition that the Defendant pays the disputed sum into court (HK$260,000 within 14 days); failure to comply will result in dismissal of the appeal with costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; order of Master C B Chan set aside; leave granted to Defendant to defend conditional on payment into court of HK$260,000 within 14 days; if Defendant fails to pay the condition, the appeal will be dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Order of Master C B Chan dated below set aside
  • Leave granted to Defendant in HCA 17724/1999 to defend conditional upon payment into court of HK$260,000 within 14 days