SO YIP FAI JOHNNY v. SHUN HING ELECTRIC SERVICE CENTRE LTD AND OTHERS

SO YIP FAI JOHNNY v. SHUN HING ELECTRIC SERVICE CENTRE LTD AND OTHERS

Extension of time was refused because the appeal lacked merit and the plaintiff gave no explanation for the delay; summary judgment was inapplicable due to procedural non‑compliance and the writ disclosed no reasonable cause of action such that striking out was justified; accordingly the Master's order was upheld...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] HKCFI 224
Parties
Plaintiff: SO YIP FAI JOHNNY; 1st Defendant: SHUN HING ELECTRIC SERVICE CENTRE LIMITED; 2nd Defendant: MR TANG PING KEUNG, SECRETARY OF SECURITY; 3rd Defendant: CONSUMER COUNCIL
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
23 January 2024
Case Number
HCA1503/2023
Procedural Posture
Appeal Against Master's Order (civil) / Out‑of‑time Appeal to Court of First Instance (rhc Order 58)
Outcome
Notice of Appeal dismissed; extension of time refused; Master's order dated 20 October 2023 upheld; Writ of Summons struck out; Summons dismissed; costs awarded to 1st and 2nd Defendants.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Strike Out, Extension of Time, Service of Process, Case Management, Pleading Sufficiency, Costs Assessment
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Consumer Protection Trade Descriptions Ordinance Costs Summary Judgment Strike Out Extension of Time Service of Process +3 more

Source-derived case record

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SO YIP FAI JOHNNY

Plaintiff

SHUN HING ELECTRIC SERVICE CENTRE LIMITED

1st Defendant

MR TANG PING KEUNG, SECRETARY OF SECURITY

2nd Defendant

CONSUMER COUNCIL

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal Against Master's Order (civil) / Out‑of‑time Appeal to Court of First Instance (rhc Order 58)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to extend time for filing the appeal
  2. 2 Whether summary judgment procedure applied and complied with
  3. 3 Whether the Writ of Summons disclosed a reasonable cause of action

Ratio Decidendi

Extension of time was refused because the appeal lacked merit and the plaintiff gave no explanation for the delay; summary judgment was inapplicable due to procedural non‑compliance and the writ disclosed no reasonable cause of action such that striking out was justified; accordingly the Master's order was upheld and costs were awarded to the defendants.

Court Disposition

Notice of Appeal dismissed; extension of time refused; Master's order dated 20 October 2023 upheld; Writ of Summons struck out; Summons dismissed; costs awarded to 1st and 2nd Defendants.

Orders

  • Notice of Appeal dated 29 November 2023 dismissed and extension of time refused
  • Order of Master SP Yip dated 20 October 2023 upheld