LAM CHUN LIN v. LEE WAI CHAO AND OTHERS

LAM CHUN LIN v. LEE WAI CHAO AND OTHERS

The appeal was dismissed because the Master's refusal to strike out was correct: a plaintiff's default judgment against one defendant does not, without privity and a final adjudication on the merits, give rise to issue estoppel preventing separate contribution or third party claims against other defendants; default judgment creates only a limited estoppel and contribution/third party proceedings may proceed independently, so the 3rd Defendant's and 4th Defendant's Notices were not frivolous or vexatious.

Citation
LAM CHUN LIN v. LEE WAI CHAO AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiff (administratrix of the Estate of Cheung Chi Keung, Deceased): Lam Chun Lin; 1st Defendant and 1st Third Party: Lee Wai Chao; 2nd Defendant and 2nd Third Party: Wong Chung Leung; 3rd Defendant and 3rd Third Party: Tang Fu; 4th Defendant: Yau Cheuk Wah
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
3 March 1998
Case Number
HCA1228/1996
Procedural Posture
Civil Tort: Wrongful Death / Contribution and Indemnity / Appeal From Master's Order Refusing to Strike Out Contribution Notice and Third Party Notice (chambers Hearing)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Strike Out, Third Party Proceedings, Contribution, Default Judgment, Issue Estoppel, Privity
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Tort Contribution and Indemnity Res Judicata/estoppel Strike Out Third Party Proceedings Contribution Default Judgment +2 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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lam Chun Lin

Plaintiff (administratrix of the Estate of Cheung Chi Keung, Deceased)

Lee Wai Chao

1st Defendant and 1st Third Party

Wong Chung Leung

2nd Defendant and 2nd Third Party

Tang Fu

3rd Defendant and 3rd Third Party

Yau Cheuk Wah

4th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Tort: Wrongful Death / Contribution and Indemnity / Appeal From Master's Order Refusing to Strike Out Contribution Notice and Third Party Notice (chambers Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a plaintiff's default judgment against one defendant precludes third party/contribution claims against a different defendant
  2. 2 Whether issue estoppel/res judicata prevents a third party or co-defendant from being sued after plaintiff's election/default judgment
  3. 3 Whether the 1st Defendant's Contribution Notice and Third Party Notice disclose a cause of action or are frivolous or vexatious

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the Master's refusal to strike out was correct: a plaintiff's default judgment against one defendant does not, without privity and a final adjudication on the merits, give rise to issue estoppel preventing separate contribution or third party claims against other defendants; default judgment creates only a limited estoppel and contribution/third party proceedings may proceed independently, so the 3rd Defendant's and 4th Defendant's Notices were not frivolous or vexatious.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs nisi to the 3rd and 4th Defendants
  • 1st Defendant's own costs to be taxed in accordance with Legal Aid Regulations