LONG HAI HONG v. CHAN YU LYDIA AND OTHERS

LONG HAI HONG v. CHAN YU LYDIA AND OTHERS

The appeal was allowed because Long failed to demonstrate a high probability of success on the rectification claim and failed to provide credible, detailed financial evidence that an order for security would stifle her claim; there were substantial factual disputes requiring trial and the respondent faced difficulty enforcing Hong Kong costs in Mainland China; accordingly it was just to order security of HK$2,600,000 to be paid into court within 21 days and to stay further proceedings against Liu until payment.

Citation
LONG HAI HONG v. CHAN YU LYDIA AND OTHERS
Parties
Applicant/claimant: Long Hai Hong; 1st Respondent: Chan Yu Lydia; 2nd Respondent: AJK Company Limited; 3rd Respondent: Liu Dan
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
10 August 2016
Case Number
HCMP3179/2013
Procedural Posture
HCMP 3179/2013 Companies Dispute (rectification/security for Costs) / Appeal to Judge in Chambers From Master's Order (rehearing)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Master and Costs Orders set aside; security for costs ordered against applicant
Legal Topics
Rectification of Register, Security for Costs, Service Out of Jurisdiction, Stay of Proceedings, Appeal From Master
Source Language
EN
Companies Law Civil Procedure Civil Litigation Costs Conflict of Laws (enforcement) Rectification of Register Security for Costs Service Out of Jurisdiction Stay of Proceedings +1 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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Long Hai Hong

Applicant/claimant

Chan Yu Lydia

1st Respondent

AJK Company Limited

2nd Respondent

Liu Dan

3rd Respondent

Procedural Posture

HCMP 3179/2013 Companies Dispute (rectification/security for Costs) / Appeal to Judge in Chambers From Master's Order (rehearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiff ordinarily resident outside jurisdiction must provide security for costs
  2. 2 Whether applicant (Long) had a high probability of success on rectification of register
  3. 3 Whether an order for security would stifle the plaintiff's claim

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was allowed because Long failed to demonstrate a high probability of success on the rectification claim and failed to provide credible, detailed financial evidence that an order for security would stifle her claim; there were substantial factual disputes requiring trial and the respondent faced difficulty enforcing Hong Kong costs in Mainland China; accordingly it was just to order security of HK$2,600,000 to be paid into court within 21 days and to stay further proceedings against Liu until payment.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Master and Costs Orders set aside; security for costs ordered against applicant

Orders

  • Long to give security for Liu's costs up to and including trial in the sum of HK$2,600,000 by paying that sum into court within 21 days from judgment
  • Until such security is paid into court, all further proceedings against Liu in this action are stayed (save Liu may tax costs under the costs order nisi and execute for recovery of taxed/agreed costs)