WONG WAN CHEE, ERNEST AND ANOTHER v. MON-KOK INVESTMENT COMPANY LIMITED AND OTHERS

WONG WAN CHEE, ERNEST AND ANOTHER v. MON-KOK INVESTMENT COMPANY LIMITED AND OTHERS

The petition against the third respondent disclosed no reasonable cause of action and was properly struck out; the third respondent is entitled to recover costs of his striking out application to be taxed if not agreed; the court will not make specific directions capping recoverable costs by date or allow a higher...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
WONG WAN CHEE, ERNEST AND ANOTHER v. MON-KOK INVESTMENT COMPANY LIMITED AND OTHERS
Parties
Petitioner: WONG WAN CHEE, ERNEST; Petitioner: LOW WONG SIU KWAN, MOLLY; Petitioner: MON-KOK INVESTMENT COMPANY LIMITED; First Respondent: WONG SIU LING; Second Respondent: WONG WAN HAY, RONALD; Third Respondent: WONG WAN CHIU, IGNATIUS
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
24 February 1997
Case Number
HCMP3985/1996
Procedural Posture
Companies Petition Under Section 168 a Companies Ordinance (chapter 32) / Interlocutory Striking Out Summons and Judgment on Costs
Outcome
The petition as against the third respondent is struck out; costs awarded to the third respondent to be taxed if not agreed; no special directions limiting costs or awarding a higher scale.
Legal Topics
Strike Out, Costs, Practice Directions, Amendment, Taxation of Costs
Source Language
en
Company Law Civil Procedure Costs Strike Out Practice Directions Amendment Taxation of Costs

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

WONG WAN CHEE, ERNEST

Petitioner

LOW WONG SIU KWAN, MOLLY

Petitioner

MON-KOK INVESTMENT COMPANY LIMITED

Petitioner

WONG SIU LING

First Respondent

WONG WAN HAY, RONALD

Second Respondent

WONG WAN CHIU, IGNATIUS

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Companies Petition Under Section 168 a Companies Ordinance (chapter 32) / Interlocutory Striking Out Summons and Judgment on Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the petition disclosed a reasonable cause of action against the third respondent
  2. 2 Whether costs should follow the event or be limited by date or scale
  3. 3 Whether correspondence amounted to an unconditional concession avoiding full preparation for hearing

Ratio Decidendi

The petition against the third respondent disclosed no reasonable cause of action and was properly struck out; the third respondent is entitled to recover costs of his striking out application to be taxed if not agreed; the court will not make specific directions capping recoverable costs by date or allow a higher scale absent justification, leaving assessment of necessity and reasonableness to the Taxing Master.

Court Disposition

The petition as against the third respondent is struck out; costs awarded to the third respondent to be taxed if not agreed; no special directions limiting costs or awarding a higher scale.

Orders

  • Petition struck out as against the third respondent
  • Costs of the third respondent's striking out application to be paid to him, to be taxed if not agreed