LEONG YUET WAH AND ANOTHER v. WONG WEI LIN AND OTHERS

LEONG YUET WAH AND ANOTHER v. WONG WEI LIN AND OTHERS

The strike out application was dismissed because the court could not conclude as a matter of law that the petition was frivolous, vexatious or an abuse or presented for a collateral purpose; there are disputed factual issues and substantial evidence which make the complaints arguable and require trial and cross-examination before conclusions can be reached.

Citation
LEONG YUET WAH AND ANOTHER v. WONG WEI LIN AND OTHERS
Parties
1st Petitioner: LEONG YUET WAH; 2nd Petitioner: WONG YU KEONG; 1st Respondent: WONG WEI LIN (also known as Mrs Loh Wong Wei Lin); 2nd Respondent: LOH SZE TI, TERENCE; 3rd Respondent: ABACUS VENTURES LIMITED; 4th Respondent: OVIN-CONSORTIUM LIMITED
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
25 October 2006
Case Number
HCMP428/2006
Procedural Posture
Petition Under Section 168 a Companies Ordinance (cap. 32) / Chambers Hearing on Respondents' Summons to Strike Out (pre Trial)
Outcome
Strike out application dismissed
Legal Topics
Strike Out, Abuse of Process, Collateral Purpose, Wrongful Increase of Capital, Capitalisation of Loans, Section 168 a Petition, Legitimate Expectation, Denial of Access to Company Records, Laches
Source Language
EN
Companies Law Civil Procedure Equity Corporate Governance Strike Out Abuse of Process Collateral Purpose Wrongful Increase of Capital +5 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 5 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

LEONG YUET WAH

1st Petitioner

WONG YU KEONG

2nd Petitioner

WONG WEI LIN (also known as Mrs Loh Wong Wei Lin)

1st Respondent

LOH SZE TI, TERENCE

2nd Respondent

ABACUS VENTURES LIMITED

3rd Respondent

OVIN-CONSORTIUM LIMITED

4th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Petition Under Section 168 a Companies Ordinance (cap. 32) / Chambers Hearing on Respondents' Summons to Strike Out (pre Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether petition is frivolous, vexatious or an abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether petition was presented for a collateral purpose
  3. 3 Whether complaints in petition are unsustainable on the evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The strike out application was dismissed because the court could not conclude as a matter of law that the petition was frivolous, vexatious or an abuse or presented for a collateral purpose; there are disputed factual issues and substantial evidence which make the complaints arguable and require trial and cross-examination before conclusions can be reached.

Court Disposition

Strike out application dismissed

Orders

  • 1st to 3rd respondents ordered to pay the petitioners' costs of this application in any event
  • Court to grant a certificate for two counsel