CHENG MAN YAU v. FORWARD DEVELOPMENT CO.

CHENG MAN YAU v. FORWARD DEVELOPMENT CO.

Because there were real and substantive disputes of fact about whether a cash payment and remittance occurred and whether mistakes existed in the running accounts, summary judgment was inappropriate; however given the tenuous nature of the Defendant's defence justice required conditional leave to defend subject to payment into court of the disputed sum within a fixed time, failing which the appeal would be dismissed.

Citation
CHENG MAN YAU v. FORWARD DEVELOPMENT CO.
Parties
Plaintiff: Plaintiff; Defendant: Defendant; Shareholder/director of Defendant: Cheng Kin Ping
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
22 February 2001
Case Number
HCA17727/1999
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal Against Summary Judgment / Appeal From Master's Summary Judgment; Conditional Leave to Defend Granted
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Master's summary judgment set aside; conditional leave to defend granted subject to payment into court.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Running Accounts, Failure of Consideration, Payment Into Court, Cheque, Conditional Leave to Defend
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Contract Commercial Law Evidence Summary Judgment Running Accounts Failure of Consideration Payment Into Court +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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Plaintiff

Plaintiff

Defendant

Defendant

Cheng Kin Ping

Shareholder/director of Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal Against Summary Judgment / Appeal From Master's Summary Judgment; Conditional Leave to Defend Granted

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether summary judgment was appropriate given disputed facts
  2. 2 Whether alleged mistake and failure of consideration defeated the cheque claim
  3. 3 Whether Defendant should be granted conditional leave to defend and required to pay money into court

Ratio Decidendi

Because there were real and substantive disputes of fact about whether a cash payment and remittance occurred and whether mistakes existed in the running accounts, summary judgment was inappropriate; however given the tenuous nature of the Defendant's defence justice required conditional leave to defend subject to payment into court of the disputed sum within a fixed time, failing which the appeal would be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Master's summary judgment set aside; conditional leave to defend granted subject to payment into court.

Orders

  • Set aside the order of Master C B Chan granting summary judgment.
  • Leave granted to the Defendant in HCA 17724/1999 to defend conditional upon payment into court of $260,000.00 within 14 days.