NUMATIC ENGINEERING LTD v. PETER XING HIU TAN

NUMATIC ENGINEERING LTD v. PETER XING HIU TAN

The appeal is dismissed and the Statement of Claim is struck out because the plaintiff, having pursued the identical cause of action against the company and obtained judgment, cannot relitigate the same claim against the respondent in circumstances that amount to an abuse of process; the subsequent action is...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
NUMATIC ENGINEERING LTD v. PETER XING HIU TAN
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Numatic Engineering Ltd.; Defendant/respondent: Peter Xing Hiu Tan (trading as Onward Trading Company)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
11 February 1980
Case Number
HCA3779/1979
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From Registrar's Order (debt Recovery) / Re‑hearing on Appeal From Registrar's Striking Out Order; Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Strike Out (order 18 Rule 19), Summary Judgment (order 14), Abuse of Process, Former Recovery / Res Judicata, Doctrine of Election, Estoppel, Default Judgment
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Contract Company Law Equity Strike Out (order 18 Rule 19) Summary Judgment (order 14) Abuse of Process Former Recovery / Res Judicata +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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Numatic Engineering Ltd.

Plaintiff/appellant

Peter Xing Hiu Tan (trading as Onward Trading Company)

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From Registrar's Order (debt Recovery) / Re‑hearing on Appeal From Registrar's Striking Out Order; Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Statement of Claim discloses a reasonable cause of action under Order 18 r.19
  2. 2 Whether the action is frivolous and vexatious and an abuse of process given earlier proceedings and judgment against the company
  3. 3 Whether plaintiff is estopped or otherwise barred from pursuing the same cause against the respondent after obtaining judgment against the company

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed and the Statement of Claim is struck out because the plaintiff, having pursued the identical cause of action against the company and obtained judgment, cannot relitigate the same claim against the respondent in circumstances that amount to an abuse of process; the subsequent action is frivolous and vexatious and the proper course was joinder or earlier action against the respondent rather than re‑litigation.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Statement of Claim struck out
  • Costs awarded to Respondent