WDA ARCHITECTS LTD v. MHS PLANNERS, ARCHITECTS & ENGINEERS AND ANOTHER

WDA ARCHITECTS LTD v. MHS PLANNERS, ARCHITECTS & ENGINEERS AND ANOTHER

The judge found the delay was not inexcusable given the uncertainty and pending directions; applied the usual test for extension of time (delay, reasons, merits, prejudice); concluded the intended appeal and a trimmed down version of the amendments were reasonably arguable; accordingly granted an extension of time to file the notice of appeal.

Citation
WDA ARCHITECTS LTD v. MHS PLANNERS, ARCHITECTS & ENGINEERS AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff: wda architects limited; 1st Defendant: MHS PLANNERS, ARCHITECTS & ENGINEERS; 2nd Defendant: MHS PLANNERS, ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS HONG KONG LIMITED
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
23 May 2014
Case Number
HCMP838/2014
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time to Appeal / Hearing in Chambers (court of Appeal)
Outcome
Extension of time to appeal granted in favour of the Plaintiff
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Leave to Amend, Notice of Appeal, Delay, Merits Test
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Appeal Pleadings and Amendments Extension of Time Leave to Amend Notice of Appeal Delay Merits Test

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

Parties

wda architects limited

Plaintiff

MHS PLANNERS, ARCHITECTS & ENGINEERS

1st Defendant

MHS PLANNERS, ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS HONG KONG LIMITED

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Extension of Time to Appeal / Hearing in Chambers (court of Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant extension of time to file a notice of appeal
  2. 2 Whether the delay was inexcusable
  3. 3 Whether an inexcusable delay requires showing a real prospect of success

Ratio Decidendi

The judge found the delay was not inexcusable given the uncertainty and pending directions; applied the usual test for extension of time (delay, reasons, merits, prejudice); concluded the intended appeal and a trimmed down version of the amendments were reasonably arguable; accordingly granted an extension of time to file the notice of appeal.

Court Disposition

Extension of time to appeal granted in favour of the Plaintiff

Orders

  • Extension of time to file and serve the Notice of Appeal granted
  • Plaintiff shall have leave to serve the Notice of Appeal within 3 days from 23 May 2014