CHAK YUET CHING v. LIN SHU MAN

CHAK YUET CHING v. LIN SHU MAN

The Court of Appeal held the judge fell into error by ordering costs against a party who successfully obtained judgment on liability under Order 14, having misconceived key facts (including the defendant's admissions and undertakings), and the order made on 7 May was therefore wrong and must be set aside.

Citation
CHAK YUET CHING v. LIN SHU MAN
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: CHAK YUET CHING; Defendant/respondent: LIN SHU MAN
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
16 September 2009
Case Number
CACV174/2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (court of Appeal, Hong Kong) / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Interlocutory Injunction, Costs Orders, Order 14, Order 29, Consent Judgment, Undertaking to Court, Assessment of Damages
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Tort Negligence Property Damage Costs Summary Judgment Interlocutory Injunction Costs Orders Order 14 +4 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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CHAK YUET CHING

Plaintiff/appellant

LIN SHU MAN

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (court of Appeal, Hong Kong) / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in ordering costs against a successful applicant for judgment under Order 14
  2. 2 Whether the Order 29 interlocutory application was unnecessary given the defendant's undertakings
  3. 3 Whether a mandatory injunction claim required inclusion in the writ and statement of claim after undertakings were given

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held the judge fell into error by ordering costs against a party who successfully obtained judgment on liability under Order 14, having misconceived key facts (including the defendant's admissions and undertakings), and the order made on 7 May was therefore wrong and must be set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Appeal allowed; order of His Honour Judge Yung dated 7 May 2009 set aside.