WORLDCOM, INC. & ANOTHER v. CLINTON ADKINS ROWE

WORLDCOM, INC. & ANOTHER v. CLINTON ADKINS ROWE

Summary judgment was refused because the defendant's explanation, while weak, was not so inherently unbelievable as to deny him a trial; however, in the exercise of discretion the defendant was granted leave to defend only on condition he pays HK$2,500,000 into court within 28 days, failing which plaintiffs may enter final judgment for HK$3,507,840 plus interest and costs.

Citation
WORLDCOM, INC. & ANOTHER v. CLINTON ADKINS ROWE
Parties
1st Plaintiff (hca 906/2001): WorldCom, Inc.; 2nd Plaintiff (hca 906/2001); Defendant (hca 5137/2001): MCI WorldCom Asia Pacific Limited; Defendant (hca 906/2001); Plaintiff (hca 5137/2001): Clinton Adkins Rowe
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
5 February 2002
Case Number
HCA906/2001
Procedural Posture
Consolidated Civil Actions: Employment/contract Dispute; Summary Judgment (order 14) and Alternative Interim Payment Application / Application for Summary Judgment/interim Payment; Leave to Defend Granted Subject to Payment Into Court
Outcome
Summary judgment refused; leave to defend granted on condition of payment into court; no order for interim payment
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Wrongful Dismissal, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Confidential Information, Repayment of Bonus (golden Handcuff), Interim Payment, Payment Into Court, Competition Between Employer and Employee Business
Source Language
EN
Employment Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Corporate Law Equity and Fiduciary Duties Conflict of Interest/competition Summary Judgment Wrongful Dismissal +6 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 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

WorldCom, Inc.

1st Plaintiff (hca 906/2001)

MCI WorldCom Asia Pacific Limited

2nd Plaintiff (hca 906/2001); Defendant (hca 5137/2001)

Clinton Adkins Rowe

Defendant (hca 906/2001); Plaintiff (hca 5137/2001)

Procedural Posture

Consolidated Civil Actions: Employment/contract Dispute; Summary Judgment (order 14) and Alternative Interim Payment Application / Application for Summary Judgment/interim Payment; Leave to Defend Granted Subject to Payment Into Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether summary judgment under Order 14 should be granted
  2. 2 Whether Defendant secretly established/operated a competing business (Blue Telecom) breaching duties and contractual restraints
  3. 3 Whether the HK$3,507,840 golden‑handcuff payment is recoverable due to dismissal for misconduct

Ratio Decidendi

Summary judgment was refused because the defendant's explanation, while weak, was not so inherently unbelievable as to deny him a trial; however, in the exercise of discretion the defendant was granted leave to defend only on condition he pays HK$2,500,000 into court within 28 days, failing which plaintiffs may enter final judgment for HK$3,507,840 plus interest and costs.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment refused; leave to defend granted on condition of payment into court; no order for interim payment

Orders

  • Defendant to pay into court HK$2,500,000 within 28 days from date of judgment
  • If Defendant fails to pay HK$2,500,000 into court within 28 days, Plaintiffs are at liberty to enter final judgment against the Defendant for HK$3,507,840 together with interest at 5% per annum from date of writ to date of judgment and thereafter at judgment rate until full payment and costs to be taxed if not agreed