GRANDE HOLDINGS LTD v. CHRISTOPHER HO WING ON
The summons under O.12 r.8A was dismissed because the defendants failed to discharge the burden to show that dismissal or directions were justified: the plaintiffs, as provisional liquidators, provided a genuine, detailed explanation for withholding service (protective writ to preserve limitation and ongoing complex investigations in the interests of creditors) and the prejudice alleged by defendants was speculative and not imminent; court objectives favour fairness and efficient use of resources, and directing service would likely be counter-productive in the circumstances.
- Citation
- GRANDE HOLDINGS LTD v. CHRISTOPHER HO WING ON
- Parties
- 1st Plaintiff: GRANDE HOLDINGS LIMITED (PROVISIONAL LIQUIDATORS APPOINTED); 2nd Plaintiff: AKAI ENTERPRISES LIMITED; 3rd Plaintiff: BRIGHTON MARKETING LIMITED; 4th Plaintiff: CAPETRONIC FAR EASTERN HOLDINGS LIMITED; 5th Plaintiff: DEVON TECHNICAL SERVICES LIMITED; 6th Plaintiff: DEXKEN LIMITED; 7th Plaintiff: EASTWOOD INDUSTRIES LIMITED; 8th Plaintiff: HI-TECH PRECISION PRODUCTS LTD; 9th Plaintiff: HI-TECH PRECISION SERVICES LIMITED; 10th Plaintiff: HONGKEW HOLDINGS LIMITED; 11th Plaintiff: LAFE HOLDINGS LIMITED; 12th Plaintiff: MILL SET LIMITED; 13th Plaintiff: NAKAMICHI VISION 21 LIMITED; 14th Plaintiff: POLYCROWN COMPANY LIMITED; 15th Plaintiff: PRIMETIME WORLD LIMITED; 16th Plaintiff: RABCO INVESTMENTS LIMITED; 17th Plaintiff: SANSUI HONG KONG LIMITED; 18th Plaintiff: SOUND FAIR ELECTRONICS COMPANY LIMITED; 19th Plaintiff: SOUND VIEW INTERNATIONAL LIMITED; 20th Plaintiff: THE ALPHA CAPITAL LIMITED; 21st Plaintiff: TOMEI INDUSTRIAL (HOLDINGS) LIMITED; 22nd Plaintiff: TWD INTERNATIONAL LTD; 23rd Plaintiff: CAPETRONIC DISPLAY DEVICES HOLDINGS LIMITED; 24th Plaintiff: CAPETRONIC TECHNOLOGY LIMITED; 25th Plaintiff: E-ZONE GROUP HOLDINGS LIMITED; 26th Plaintiff: GRANDE N.A.K.S. LTD; 27th Plaintiff: HI-TECH INTERNATIONAL LIMITED; 28th Plaintiff: HI-TECH PRECISION PRODUCTS LIMITED; 29th Plaintiff: INNOVATIVE CAPITAL LTD; 30th Plaintiff: N.A.K.S. INTERNATIONAL LTD; 31st Plaintiff: NAKAMICHI ENTERPRISES LIMITED; 32nd Plaintiff: PHENOMENON AGENTS LIMITED; 33rd Plaintiff: S & T INTERNATIONAL DISTRIBUTION LIMITED; 34th Plaintiff: SANSUI ACOUSTICS RESEARCH CORPORATION; 35th Plaintiff: SANSUI ELECTRIC CO., LTD.; 36th Plaintiff: SANSUI ENTERPRISES LIMITED; 37th Plaintiff: SUPER BRAND GLOBAL LIMITED; 38th Plaintiff: THE ALPHA CAPITAL SERVICES LTD; 39th Plaintiff: THE GRANDE CAPITAL GROUP LIMITED; 40th Plaintiff: THE GRANDE EXPLORER LTD; 41st Plaintiff: THE GRANDE (NOMINEES) LIMITED; 42nd Plaintiff: THE GRANDE RESTAURANTS LIMITED; 43rd Plaintiff: THE GRANDE (SECRETARIES) SERVICE LIMITED; 44th Plaintiff: TOMEI INTERNATIONAL (B.V.I) LIMITED; 45th Plaintiff: TOMEI KAWA ELECTRONICS INTERNATIONAL LIMITED; 46th Plaintiff: TWD INDUSTRIAL COMPANY LIMITED; 47th Plaintiff: TWD INTERNATIONAL LIMITED; 48th Plaintiff: TOMEI TECHNOLOGIES LTD; 49th Plaintiff: UNIJOY LIMITED; 50th Plaintiff: AFFIRMED ELECTRONICS PTE LTD; 51st Plaintiff: AKAI SALES PTE. LTD (IN PROVISIONAL LIQUIDATION); 52nd Plaintiff: CAFE AL FRESCO PTE LTD; 53rd Plaintiff: CAPETRONIC GROUP PTE. LTD.; 54th Plaintiff: CAPETRONIC MULTIMEDIA DEVELOPMENT PTE. LTD.; 55th Plaintiff: EAST COAST WORKS PTE LTD; 56th Plaintiff: E-ZONE (BALESTIER) PTE LTD; 57th Plaintiff: E-ZONE (LIAT TOWERS) PTE LTD; 58th Plaintiff: E-ZONE ENGINEERING PTE. LTD.; 59th Plaintiff: E-ZONE MANAGEMENT PTE LTD; 60th Plaintiff: HONG KONG ABERDEEN SEAFOOD RESTAURANT PTE LTD; 61st Plaintiff: NAKAMICHI CORPORATION LIMITED; 62nd Plaintiff: NAKAMICHI RESEARCH(S) PTE LTD; 63rd Plaintiff: GRANDE N.A.K.S PTE LTD (FORMERLY KNOWN AS SANSUI (SINGAPORE) PTE LIMITED); 64th Plaintiff: THE GRANDE GROUP LIMITED; 65th Plaintiff: TOMEI (SINGAPORE) PTE LTD; 1st Defendant: CHRISTOPHER HO WING ON; 2nd Defendant: ADRIAN MA CHI CHIU; 3rd Defendant: CHRISTINE ASPREY LAI SHAN; 4th Defendant: HENRY CHONG CHIN SHANG; 5th Defendant: HERBERT TSOI HAK KONG; 6th Defendant: JOHNNY LAU WING HUNG; 7th Defendant: LAM CHUCK FAI; 8th Defendant: MARTIN LAN WRIGHT; 9th Defendant: MICHAEL ANDREW BARCLAY BINNEY; 10th Defendant: PAUL LAW KWOK FAI
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Jurisdiction
- Hong Kong
- Judgment Date
- 9 October 2013
- Case Number
- HCA565/2013
- Procedural Posture
- Protective Writ in a Winding Up Related Civil Action; Application Under O.12 R.8 a / Pre Service Application to Dismiss or Compel Service (summons Heard 8 October 2013)
- Outcome
- Defendants' summons dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Service of Writ, O.12 R.8 a Applications, Protective Writs, Provisional Liquidation, Case Management, Prejudice From Being Named as Defendant
- Source Language
- EN
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
GRANDE HOLDINGS LIMITED (PROVISIONAL LIQUIDATORS APPOINTED)
1st Plaintiff
AKAI ENTERPRISES LIMITED
2nd Plaintiff
BRIGHTON MARKETING LIMITED
3rd Plaintiff
CAPETRONIC FAR EASTERN HOLDINGS LIMITED
4th Plaintiff
DEVON TECHNICAL SERVICES LIMITED
5th Plaintiff
DEXKEN LIMITED
6th Plaintiff
EASTWOOD INDUSTRIES LIMITED
7th Plaintiff
HI-TECH PRECISION PRODUCTS LTD
8th Plaintiff
HI-TECH PRECISION SERVICES LIMITED
9th Plaintiff
HONGKEW HOLDINGS LIMITED
10th Plaintiff
LAFE HOLDINGS LIMITED
11th Plaintiff
MILL SET LIMITED
12th Plaintiff
NAKAMICHI VISION 21 LIMITED
13th Plaintiff
POLYCROWN COMPANY LIMITED
14th Plaintiff
PRIMETIME WORLD LIMITED
15th Plaintiff
RABCO INVESTMENTS LIMITED
16th Plaintiff
SANSUI HONG KONG LIMITED
17th Plaintiff
SOUND FAIR ELECTRONICS COMPANY LIMITED
18th Plaintiff
SOUND VIEW INTERNATIONAL LIMITED
19th Plaintiff
THE ALPHA CAPITAL LIMITED
20th Plaintiff
TOMEI INDUSTRIAL (HOLDINGS) LIMITED
21st Plaintiff
TWD INTERNATIONAL LTD
22nd Plaintiff
CAPETRONIC DISPLAY DEVICES HOLDINGS LIMITED
23rd Plaintiff
CAPETRONIC TECHNOLOGY LIMITED
24th Plaintiff
E-ZONE GROUP HOLDINGS LIMITED
25th Plaintiff
GRANDE N.A.K.S. LTD
26th Plaintiff
HI-TECH INTERNATIONAL LIMITED
27th Plaintiff
HI-TECH PRECISION PRODUCTS LIMITED
28th Plaintiff
INNOVATIVE CAPITAL LTD
29th Plaintiff
N.A.K.S. INTERNATIONAL LTD
30th Plaintiff
NAKAMICHI ENTERPRISES LIMITED
31st Plaintiff
PHENOMENON AGENTS LIMITED
32nd Plaintiff
S & T INTERNATIONAL DISTRIBUTION LIMITED
33rd Plaintiff
SANSUI ACOUSTICS RESEARCH CORPORATION
34th Plaintiff
SANSUI ELECTRIC CO., LTD.
35th Plaintiff
SANSUI ENTERPRISES LIMITED
36th Plaintiff
SUPER BRAND GLOBAL LIMITED
37th Plaintiff
THE ALPHA CAPITAL SERVICES LTD
38th Plaintiff
THE GRANDE CAPITAL GROUP LIMITED
39th Plaintiff
THE GRANDE EXPLORER LTD
40th Plaintiff
THE GRANDE (NOMINEES) LIMITED
41st Plaintiff
THE GRANDE RESTAURANTS LIMITED
42nd Plaintiff
THE GRANDE (SECRETARIES) SERVICE LIMITED
43rd Plaintiff
TOMEI INTERNATIONAL (B.V.I) LIMITED
44th Plaintiff
TOMEI KAWA ELECTRONICS INTERNATIONAL LIMITED
45th Plaintiff
TWD INDUSTRIAL COMPANY LIMITED
46th Plaintiff
TWD INTERNATIONAL LIMITED
47th Plaintiff
TOMEI TECHNOLOGIES LTD
48th Plaintiff
UNIJOY LIMITED
49th Plaintiff
AFFIRMED ELECTRONICS PTE LTD
50th Plaintiff
AKAI SALES PTE. LTD (IN PROVISIONAL LIQUIDATION)
51st Plaintiff
CAFE AL FRESCO PTE LTD
52nd Plaintiff
CAPETRONIC GROUP PTE. LTD.
53rd Plaintiff
CAPETRONIC MULTIMEDIA DEVELOPMENT PTE. LTD.
54th Plaintiff
EAST COAST WORKS PTE LTD
55th Plaintiff
E-ZONE (BALESTIER) PTE LTD
56th Plaintiff
E-ZONE (LIAT TOWERS) PTE LTD
57th Plaintiff
E-ZONE ENGINEERING PTE. LTD.
58th Plaintiff
E-ZONE MANAGEMENT PTE LTD
59th Plaintiff
HONG KONG ABERDEEN SEAFOOD RESTAURANT PTE LTD
60th Plaintiff
NAKAMICHI CORPORATION LIMITED
61st Plaintiff
NAKAMICHI RESEARCH(S) PTE LTD
62nd Plaintiff
GRANDE N.A.K.S PTE LTD (FORMERLY KNOWN AS SANSUI (SINGAPORE) PTE LIMITED)
63rd Plaintiff
THE GRANDE GROUP LIMITED
64th Plaintiff
TOMEI (SINGAPORE) PTE LTD
65th Plaintiff
CHRISTOPHER HO WING ON
1st Defendant
ADRIAN MA CHI CHIU
2nd Defendant
CHRISTINE ASPREY LAI SHAN
3rd Defendant
HENRY CHONG CHIN SHANG
4th Defendant
HERBERT TSOI HAK KONG
5th Defendant
JOHNNY LAU WING HUNG
6th Defendant
LAM CHUCK FAI
7th Defendant
MARTIN LAN WRIGHT
8th Defendant
MICHAEL ANDREW BARCLAY BINNEY
9th Defendant
PAUL LAW KWOK FAI
10th Defendant
Procedural Posture
Protective Writ in a Winding Up Related Civil Action; Application Under O.12 R.8 a / Pre Service Application to Dismiss or Compel Service (summons Heard 8 October 2013)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether court should dismiss action under O.12 r.8A when writ has not been served and plaintiff refuses to serve
- 2 Whether asserted potential prejudice from being named as defendant justifies dismissal
- 3 Whether a direction to serve the writ should be given where plaintiffs are conducting investigations as provisional liquidators
Ratio Decidendi
The summons under O.12 r.8A was dismissed because the defendants failed to discharge the burden to show that dismissal or directions were justified: the plaintiffs, as provisional liquidators, provided a genuine, detailed explanation for withholding service (protective writ to preserve limitation and ongoing complex investigations in the interests of creditors) and the prejudice alleged by defendants was speculative and not imminent; court objectives favour fairness and efficient use of resources, and directing service would likely be counter-productive in the circumstances.
Court Disposition
Defendants' summons dismissed
Orders
- Summons dismissed with costs to the plaintiffs
- No award of costs on indemnity basis (costs awarded to plaintiffs on standard basis)
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment