WONG CHUN KEUNG AND ANOTHER v. LEE TAK KUEN KENNY AND ANOTHER

WONG CHUN KEUNG AND ANOTHER v. LEE TAK KUEN KENNY AND ANOTHER

The Registrar accepted the 1st Defendant's unchallenged affirmation that he did not have the company reports and had made reasonable attempts to obtain them; it was not within his reasonable power to obtain those documents as director, therefore he had complied with the 4 May 2005 order and the plaintiffs' application for an unless order was dismissed; costs awarded to the 1st Defendant in the sum of $500 and an order nisi to become absolute in 14 days.

Citation
WONG CHUN KEUNG AND ANOTHER v. LEE TAK KUEN KENNY AND ANOTHER
Parties
1st Plaintiff: WONG CHUN KEUNG; 2nd Plaintiff: NG KA CHUN; 1st Defendant: LEE TAK KUEN KENNY; 2nd Defendant: LO KA WO
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
6 March 2006
Case Number
HCA831/2002
Procedural Posture
Civil: Discovery/unless Order / Interlocutory Hearing (registrar)
Outcome
Application dismissed; Plaintiffs' request for unless order refused; 1st Defendant's defence not struck off.
Legal Topics
Unless Order, Disclosure of Documents, Director's Control of Company Documents, Costs
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Company Law Disclosure/discovery Unless Order Disclosure of Documents Director's Control of Company Documents Costs

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 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

WONG CHUN KEUNG

1st Plaintiff

NG KA CHUN

2nd Plaintiff

LEE TAK KUEN KENNY

1st Defendant

LO KA WO

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil: Discovery/unless Order / Interlocutory Hearing (registrar)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 1st Defendant was under an obligation to produce company reports and financial statements
  2. 2 Whether documents of the company were within the custody or power of the 1st Defendant as a director
  3. 3 Whether the 1st Defendant complied with the order of 4 May 2005 and whether an unless order was appropriate

Ratio Decidendi

The Registrar accepted the 1st Defendant's unchallenged affirmation that he did not have the company reports and had made reasonable attempts to obtain them; it was not within his reasonable power to obtain those documents as director, therefore he had complied with the 4 May 2005 order and the plaintiffs' application for an unless order was dismissed; costs awarded to the 1st Defendant in the sum of $500 and an order nisi to become absolute in 14 days.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; Plaintiffs' request for unless order refused; 1st Defendant's defence not struck off.

Orders

  • 1st Defendant's application dismissed; Plaintiffs' unless order refused.
  • Costs of the application and appearances on 19 December 2005 and 10 February 2006 assessed in the sum of $500.00 to be paid upon this order being made absolute.