WORLDCOM, INC AND ANOTHER v. CLINTON ADKINS ROWE

WORLDCOM, INC AND ANOTHER v. CLINTON ADKINS ROWE

There were triable issues so leave to defend should be granted but the trial judge erred by imposing HK$2.5M without hearing the defendant's financial representations; the appropriate conditional payment was reduced to HK$400,000 payable within 28 days; no stay of execution was granted because the counterclaim was unlikely to succeed; costs to follow the stipulated nisi order.

Citation
WORLDCOM, INC AND 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 Appeal
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
2 August 2002
Case Number
CACV161/2002
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (summary Judgment/leave to Defend; Employment/dismissal Dispute) / Court of Appeal Determination on Appeal From Deputy High Court Judge Following Order 14 Summary Judgment Application
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; cross-appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment/leave to Defend, Wrongful Dismissal, Breach of Contract, Competition/conflict of Interest, Security for Costs/condition to Defend
Source Language
EN
Employment Law Civil Procedure Contract Law Summary Judgment/leave to Defend Wrongful Dismissal Breach of Contract Competition/conflict of Interest Security for Costs/condition to Defend

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 2 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

Civil Appeal (summary Judgment/leave to Defend; Employment/dismissal Dispute) / Court of Appeal Determination on Appeal From Deputy High Court Judge Following Order 14 Summary Judgment Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether defendant's involvement in Blue Telecom constituted misconduct justifying summary dismissal
  2. 2 Whether Blue Telecom was in direct competition with the 2nd plaintiff
  3. 3 Whether the defence was 'shadowy' so as to justify conditioning leave to defend on payment into court

Ratio Decidendi

There were triable issues so leave to defend should be granted but the trial judge erred by imposing HK$2.5M without hearing the defendant's financial representations; the appropriate conditional payment was reduced to HK$400,000 payable within 28 days; no stay of execution was granted because the counterclaim was unlikely to succeed; costs to follow the stipulated nisi order.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; cross-appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave to defend granted subject to payment into court of HK$400,000 within 28 days
  • Original condition of HK$2,500,000 set by Deputy High Court Judge varied to HK$400,000