UNIVERSAL BOATS TRADING LTD v. SOO WAI MAN AND ANOTHER

UNIVERSAL BOATS TRADING LTD v. SOO WAI MAN AND ANOTHER

There was inordinate and inexcusable delay by the plaintiff but the defendant failed to establish that the delay caused such prejudice or risk to a fair trial as would justify striking out; the plaintiff did not deliberately disobey court orders or abuse the process; accordingly the striking out application was dismissed and the case directed to proceed to trial with specific case management directions.

Citation
UNIVERSAL BOATS TRADING LTD v. SOO WAI MAN AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff: Plaintiff; 1st Defendant: 1st Defendant; 2nd Defendant: 2nd Defendant; Third Party: Third Party
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
28 April 2011
Case Number
DCCJ797/2002
Procedural Posture
Civil Negligence Claim (district Court) With Third Party Proceedings / Interlocutory Application to Strike Out for Want of Prosecution
Outcome
1st Defendant's summons to strike out for want of prosecution dismissed; action not struck out
Legal Topics
Want of Prosecution, Abuse of Process, Delay and Prejudice, Estoppel, Expert Evidence, Case Management, Mediation
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Negligence (tort) Evidence Costs Third Party Proceedings Want of Prosecution Abuse of Process Delay and Prejudice +4 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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Plaintiff

Plaintiff

1st Defendant

1st Defendant

2nd Defendant

2nd Defendant

Third Party

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Civil Negligence Claim (district Court) With Third Party Proceedings / Interlocutory Application to Strike Out for Want of Prosecution

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff's delay was inordinate and inexcusable
  2. 2 Whether the delay caused a substantial risk that a fair trial is not possible or caused serious prejudice to defendants
  3. 3 Whether the defendant is estopped from applying to strike out by prior conduct

Ratio Decidendi

There was inordinate and inexcusable delay by the plaintiff but the defendant failed to establish that the delay caused such prejudice or risk to a fair trial as would justify striking out; the plaintiff did not deliberately disobey court orders or abuse the process; accordingly the striking out application was dismissed and the case directed to proceed to trial with specific case management directions.

Court Disposition

1st Defendant's summons to strike out for want of prosecution dismissed; action not struck out

Orders

  • Summons by 1st Defendant dismissed
  • Plaintiff to apply within 21 days to restore the case management summons before the Master for further directions