R.A. STEGEMANN v. WISE POWER FAR EAST LTD AND OTHERS

R.A. STEGEMANN v. WISE POWER FAR EAST LTD AND OTHERS

The Registrar's determinations were correct: Claims D and E were properly characterised as claims for costs not damages and correctly struck out; there was insufficient evidence to sustain claims against the 3rd defendant so the striking-out of those claims was appropriate; the Registrar's directions as to costs (including a nisi order) remain in force; the matter should be transferred to the District Court under section 43. The appeal is dismissed and no alteration to the Registrar's decision is made.

Citation
R.A. STEGEMANN v. WISE POWER FAR EAST LTD AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiff (hca282)/defendant (hca283): R.A. Stegemann; 1st Defendant (hca282)/1st Plaintiff (hca283): Wise Power Far East Ltd; 2nd Defendant (hca282)/2nd Plaintiff (hca283): Ho Chun Hung Lawrence trading as; 3rd Defendant (hca282)/plaintiff (hca283): Time Enterprises Company / Time Enterprises Publications Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
3 August 2006
Case Number
HCA282/2005
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Registrar's Interlocutory Decisions in Civil Proceedings / Hearing on Appeal in Chambers; Decision and Orders Given
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; Registrar Chan's decisions upheld; matter transferred to District Court under section 43
Legal Topics
Strike Out, Costs Follow the Event, Nisi Costs Order, Damages Vs Costs, Amendment of Statement of Claim, Transfer to District Court (s.43)
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Costs Law Contract Law Court Jurisdiction/transfer Strike Out Costs Follow the Event Nisi Costs Order Damages Vs Costs +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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R.A. Stegemann

Plaintiff (hca282)/defendant (hca283)

Wise Power Far East Ltd

1st Defendant (hca282)/1st Plaintiff (hca283)

Ho Chun Hung Lawrence trading as

2nd Defendant (hca282)/2nd Plaintiff (hca283)

Time Enterprises Company / Time Enterprises Publications Limited

3rd Defendant (hca282)/plaintiff (hca283)

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Registrar's Interlocutory Decisions in Civil Proceedings / Hearing on Appeal in Chambers; Decision and Orders Given

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Claims D and E constituted claims for costs or for damages and were properly struck out
  2. 2 Whether the 3rd defendant ought to remain in the proceedings in absence of contract or other basis for inclusion
  3. 3 Appropriate order as to costs and the effect of Registrar's nisi costs order

Ratio Decidendi

The Registrar's determinations were correct: Claims D and E were properly characterised as claims for costs not damages and correctly struck out; there was insufficient evidence to sustain claims against the 3rd defendant so the striking-out of those claims was appropriate; the Registrar's directions as to costs (including a nisi order) remain in force; the matter should be transferred to the District Court under section 43. The appeal is dismissed and no alteration to the Registrar's decision is made.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; Registrar Chan's decisions upheld; matter transferred to District Court under section 43

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and Registrar's decision in respect of striking out Claims D and E and striking out claims against the 3rd defendant upheld
  • No alterations or amendments to Registrar Chan's decision