LIN MAN YUAN v. KIN MING HOLDINGS INTERNATIONAL LTD AND ANOTHER

LIN MAN YUAN v. KIN MING HOLDINGS INTERNATIONAL LTD AND ANOTHER

Lin was held to be ordinarily resident outside Hong Kong and she did not demonstrate the existence of fixed and permanent assets in Hong Kong sufficient to satisfy a likely adverse costs order; a Hong Kong bank cash deposit alone was insufficient assurance; in all the circumstances it was just to order security for costs and the appropriate quantum by broad brush was fixed at HK$6,000,000 payable into court within 21 days, failure of which would lead to dismissal of the main action.

Citation
LIN MAN YUAN v. KIN MING HOLDINGS INTERNATIONAL LTD AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff (main Action); 1st Defendant (by Counterclaim): Lin Man Yuan; 1st Defendant (main Action); 1st Plaintiff (by Counterclaim): Kin Ming Holdings International Limited; 2nd Defendant (main Action); 2nd Plaintiff (by Counterclaim): Jose Kho
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
29 November 2013
Case Number
HCA216/2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Action (contract/dispute Over Land Development With Counterclaim) / Pre Trial Appeal Against Registrar's Refusal of Application for Security for Costs; Trial Fixed for September 2014
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Registrar's refusal set aside; security for costs ordered
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Joinder, Counterclaim, Enforcement of Costs, Default Judgment, Service of Process
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Contract Property Law Costs Injunction Appeal Security for Costs Joinder +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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lin Man Yuan

Plaintiff (main Action); 1st Defendant (by Counterclaim)

Kin Ming Holdings International Limited

1st Defendant (main Action); 1st Plaintiff (by Counterclaim)

Jose Kho

2nd Defendant (main Action); 2nd Plaintiff (by Counterclaim)

Procedural Posture

Civil Action (contract/dispute Over Land Development With Counterclaim) / Pre Trial Appeal Against Registrar's Refusal of Application for Security for Costs; Trial Fixed for September 2014

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to order security for costs under Order 23 rule 1
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff is ordinarily resident outside the jurisdiction
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff has fixed and substantial assets in Hong Kong sufficient to meet an adverse costs order

Ratio Decidendi

Lin was held to be ordinarily resident outside Hong Kong and she did not demonstrate the existence of fixed and permanent assets in Hong Kong sufficient to satisfy a likely adverse costs order; a Hong Kong bank cash deposit alone was insufficient assurance; in all the circumstances it was just to order security for costs and the appropriate quantum by broad brush was fixed at HK$6,000,000 payable into court within 21 days, failure of which would lead to dismissal of the main action.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Registrar's refusal set aside; security for costs ordered

Orders

  • Plaintiff to pay into court HK$6,000,000 as security for costs within 21 days
  • Until security is provided, all further proceedings stayed