TIONG KING SING v. SAM BOON PENG YEE AND ANOTHER

TIONG KING SING v. SAM BOON PENG YEE AND ANOTHER

Para 26E(vii) did not introduce a new cause of action but merely alleged a subsequent act in support of an already accrued cause of action for interference with contractual performance; therefore amendments to include para 26E(vii) and 38A are permitted, with costs and counsel certificate orders as directed.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
TIONG KING SING v. SAM BOON PENG YEE AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff: Tiong King Sing; 1st Defendant: Sam Boon Peng Yee; 2nd Defendant: New Sunshine Investments Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
26 June 2012
Case Number
HCA1517/2011
Procedural Posture
Application to Amend Defence and Counterclaim / Interlocutory (chambers Decision)
Outcome
Amendments in paras 26E(vii) and 38A allowed; costs ordered; certificate for two counsel refused and certificate for one counsel granted
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Relation Back Rule, Accrual of Cause of Action, Implied Terms, Interference With Contractual Performance, Certificate for Counsel
Source Language
en
Contract Civil Procedure Costs Evidence Amendment of Pleadings Relation Back Rule Accrual of Cause of Action Implied Terms +2 more

Source-derived case record

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tiong King Sing

Plaintiff

Sam Boon Peng Yee

1st Defendant

New Sunshine Investments Limited

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application to Amend Defence and Counterclaim / Interlocutory (chambers Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether para 26E(vii) raised a new cause of action after filing of the defence and counterclaim
  2. 2 Whether the proposed amendments (para 26E(vii) and 38A) should be allowed
  3. 3 Allocation of costs resulting from the amendment application

Ratio Decidendi

Para 26E(vii) did not introduce a new cause of action but merely alleged a subsequent act in support of an already accrued cause of action for interference with contractual performance; therefore amendments to include para 26E(vii) and 38A are permitted, with costs and counsel certificate orders as directed.

Court Disposition

Amendments in paras 26E(vii) and 38A allowed; costs ordered; certificate for two counsel refused and certificate for one counsel granted

Orders

  • Amendments in paras 26E(vii) and 38A are allowed
  • Costs of and occasioned by the amendment are to be borne by the defendants, to be taxed if not agreed