TIMES-RINGIER (HK) LTD. v. TIN TIN PUBLICATION DEVELOPMENT LTD. AND OTHERS

TIMES-RINGIER (HK) LTD. v. TIN TIN PUBLICATION DEVELOPMENT LTD. AND OTHERS

The judge held the 4th defendant failed to demonstrate any triable issue or inability to verify the $1.5 million item given the plaintiff's production of invoices and correspondence and the 4th defendant's position as director with access to records; therefore the summary judgment was correctly entered and the appeal was dismissed.

Citation
TIMES-RINGIER (HK) LTD. v. TIN TIN PUBLICATION DEVELOPMENT LTD. AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiff: Times-Ringier (HK) Limited; 1st Defendant: Tin Tin Publication Development Ltd; 2nd Defendant: Televerse International Ltd; 3rd Defendant: Lau Shun-Chi, Benjamin; 4th Defendant: Woo Kwok-Hang, Henry
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
28 August 2001
Case Number
HCA1370/2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Action Summary Judgment and Guarantor Liability / Appeal From Summary Judgment (court of First Instance Hearing)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; summary judgment and interlocutory judgment of the Master affirmed.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Guarantee, Assignment, Accounting, Director Liability, Discovery/inspection
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Contract Commercial Law Debt Recovery Guarantee and Indemnity Summary Judgment Guarantee Assignment +3 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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Times-Ringier (HK) Limited

Plaintiff

Tin Tin Publication Development Ltd

1st Defendant

Televerse International Ltd

2nd Defendant

Lau Shun-Chi, Benjamin

3rd Defendant

Woo Kwok-Hang, Henry

4th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action Summary Judgment and Guarantor Liability / Appeal From Summary Judgment (court of First Instance Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appeal should succeed to defeat summary judgment for the $1.5 million item
  2. 2 Whether the 4th defendant as guarantor was liable given default by the 1st defendant
  3. 3 Whether plaintiff had failed to account for assigned debts and payments

Ratio Decidendi

The judge held the 4th defendant failed to demonstrate any triable issue or inability to verify the $1.5 million item given the plaintiff's production of invoices and correspondence and the 4th defendant's position as director with access to records; therefore the summary judgment was correctly entered and the appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; summary judgment and interlocutory judgment of the Master affirmed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.
  • Master's summary judgment for $7,667,636 with interest is affirmed.