YUE MI YING AND ANOTHER v. CHEUNG MAN HONG AND ANOTHER

YUE MI YING AND ANOTHER v. CHEUNG MAN HONG AND ANOTHER

There are genuine disputes of fact or mixed law and fact about the defendants' alleged shareholder status and estoppel which cannot be resolved on originating summons; accordingly the court exercised the power under RHC Ord.28 r.8(1) to order that the action continue as if begun by writ so those disputes can be determined.

Citation
YUE MI YING AND ANOTHER v. CHEUNG MAN HONG AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff: Plaintiffs; 1st Defendant: CHEUNG MAN HONG; 2nd Defendant: NG SIN MUN
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
18 June 2007
Case Number
HCMP175/2007
Procedural Posture
Originating Summons (civil Company Dispute) / Directions Hearing Order to Continue as If Begun by Writ
Outcome
Summons for directions granted in part in favour of defendants; action ordered to continue as if begun by writ; vacating of listed hearing date for originating summons; costs to defendants.
Legal Topics
Shareholder Status, Estoppel, Locus Standi to Sue, Conversion of Originating Summons to Writ, Pleadings Directions
Source Language
EN
Company Law Civil Procedure Equity Shareholder Status Estoppel Locus Standi to Sue Conversion of Originating Summons to Writ Pleadings Directions

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff

CHEUNG MAN HONG

1st Defendant

NG SIN MUN

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Originating Summons (civil Company Dispute) / Directions Hearing Order to Continue as If Begun by Writ

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants are shareholders of the Company
  2. 2 Whether the doctrine of estoppel can establish or affect shareholder status
  3. 3 Whether factual disputes exist that preclude determination on originating summons

Ratio Decidendi

There are genuine disputes of fact or mixed law and fact about the defendants' alleged shareholder status and estoppel which cannot be resolved on originating summons; accordingly the court exercised the power under RHC Ord.28 r.8(1) to order that the action continue as if begun by writ so those disputes can be determined.

Court Disposition

Summons for directions granted in part in favour of defendants; action ordered to continue as if begun by writ; vacating of listed hearing date for originating summons; costs to defendants.

Orders

  • Action to continue as if begun by writ
  • Consequential directions relating to pleadings