YAU SIU HIN GEORGE t/a GEORGE YAU & HO v. HO MAN KIT AND ANOTHER

YAU SIU HIN GEORGE t/a GEORGE YAU & HO v. HO MAN KIT AND ANOTHER

Admissions in the appellant's affirmations established contractual liability under the Agreement; the 1st Defendant procured the 2nd Defendant to issue cheques making them jointly and severally liable; s.5 Cap 377 permits judgment against both; the alleged condition precedent was unsupported and inadmissible; Meyer did not assist because the partnership had dissolved and the debit note post-dated retirement; no arguable defence existed, so summary judgment stands and the appeal fails.

Citation
YAU SIU HIN GEORGE t/a GEORGE YAU & HO v. HO MAN KIT AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: YAU SIU HIN GEORGE trading as GEORGE YAU & HO; 1st Defendant/appellant: HO MAN KIT alias HO MAN KIT HORACE; 2nd Defendant: MANIVEST SECRETARIAL SERVICES LIMITED
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
13 August 1998
Case Number
HCA406/1998
Procedural Posture
Contract Action (cheques) Summary Judgment / Appeal by Rehearing Against Master's Summary Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Dishonoured Cheques, Joint and Several Liability, Condition Precedent, Contribution, Partnership Dissolution
Source Language
EN
Contract Law Civil Procedure Partnership Law Negotiable Instruments Summary Judgment Dishonoured Cheques Joint and Several Liability Condition Precedent +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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

YAU SIU HIN GEORGE trading as GEORGE YAU & HO

Plaintiff/respondent

HO MAN KIT alias HO MAN KIT HORACE

1st Defendant/appellant

MANIVEST SECRETARIAL SERVICES LIMITED

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Contract Action (cheques) Summary Judgment / Appeal by Rehearing Against Master's Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether judgment against both defendants was regular given alleged several liability
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff's claim constituted unenforceable liquidated damages
  3. 3 Whether payment was subject to a condition precedent (return of files) and thus defence to payment on cheques

Ratio Decidendi

Admissions in the appellant's affirmations established contractual liability under the Agreement; the 1st Defendant procured the 2nd Defendant to issue cheques making them jointly and severally liable; s.5 Cap 377 permits judgment against both; the alleged condition precedent was unsupported and inadmissible; Meyer did not assist because the partnership had dissolved and the debit note post-dated retirement; no arguable defence existed, so summary judgment stands and the appeal fails.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Summary judgment against both defendants for HK$75,250 confirmed
  • Appeal dismissed with costs to the Plaintiff/Respondent