CHAN HON CHOI AND ANOTHER v. CHENG SO MEI AND OTHERS

CHAN HON CHOI AND ANOTHER v. CHENG SO MEI AND OTHERS

The appeal is dismissed because the plaintiffs failed to comply with the unless order by the deadline, the late affirmation was inadequate and added no new evidence or authority, there were no new factors justifying a different exercise of discretion from the Master and Order 2 rule 4 requires timely application for relief from the sanction.

Citation
CHAN HON CHOI AND ANOTHER v. CHENG SO MEI AND OTHERS
Parties
1st Plaintiff: Chan Hon Choi; 2nd Plaintiff: Hong Kong Region China Peaceful Reunification Association Limited; 1st Defendant: Cheng So Mei; 2nd Defendant: Ho Thick Man; 3rd Defendant: Wong Chi Hung; 4th Defendant: Tsui Ka Kit Alexander
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
23 February 2010
Case Number
HCMP1443/2009
Procedural Posture
Companies Ordinance, Originating Summons (company Law) / Appeal From Master's Striking Out Order for Non Compliance With an Unless Order; Decision in Court of First Instance
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs to the defendants.
Legal Topics
Unless Order, Strike Out for Non Compliance, Affirmations in Support of Originating Summons (order 28 R 1 A), Relief From Sanction (order 2 R 4), Affirmations Taken Abroad (order 41 R 12)
Source Language
EN
Company Law Civil Procedure Court Practice and Procedure Unless Order Strike Out for Non Compliance Affirmations in Support of Originating Summons (order 28 R 1 A) Relief From Sanction (order 2 R 4) Affirmations Taken Abroad (order 41 R 12)

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chan Hon Choi

1st Plaintiff

Hong Kong Region China Peaceful Reunification Association Limited

2nd Plaintiff

Cheng So Mei

1st Defendant

Ho Thick Man

2nd Defendant

Wong Chi Hung

3rd Defendant

Tsui Ka Kit Alexander

4th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Companies Ordinance, Originating Summons (company Law) / Appeal From Master's Striking Out Order for Non Compliance With an Unless Order; Decision in Court of First Instance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs complied with the unless order and filed proper affirmations by the deadline
  2. 2 Whether the court should exercise its discretion on appeal to relieve the plaintiffs from the sanction of dismissal
  3. 3 Whether the late and inadequate affirmation provided effective authority and new evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the plaintiffs failed to comply with the unless order by the deadline, the late affirmation was inadequate and added no new evidence or authority, there were no new factors justifying a different exercise of discretion from the Master and Order 2 rule 4 requires timely application for relief from the sanction.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs to the defendants.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs to the defendants.