YIFUNG DEVELOPMENTS LTD v. LIU CHI KEUNG RICKY AND OTHERS

YIFUNG DEVELOPMENTS LTD v. LIU CHI KEUNG RICKY AND OTHERS

The court concluded that Linklaters and YDL deliberately failed to issue a summons within the prescribed time, reliance on a letter and commentary did not excuse the delay, and the unexplained delay caused prejudice; accordingly the application for extension of time to file the variation summons and the subsequent application to amend were dismissed as unjustified and abusive.

Citation
YIFUNG DEVELOPMENTS LTD v. LIU CHI KEUNG RICKY AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiff: Yifung Developments Limited; 1st Defendant: Liu Chi Keung Ricky; 2nd Defendant: Ho Sing Chung Robert; 3rd Defendant: Choy Siu Fung Rebecca
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
24 November 2016
Case Number
HCA1341/2014
Procedural Posture
Costs Variation Application / Ruling on Applications for Extension of Time and to Amend
Outcome
Application to extend time and application to amend dismissed
Legal Topics
Variation of Costs Order Nisi, Extension of Time, Amendment of Summons, Abuse of Process
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Costs Variation of Costs Order Nisi Extension of Time Amendment of Summons Abuse of Process

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yifung Developments Limited

Plaintiff

Liu Chi Keung Ricky

1st Defendant

Ho Sing Chung Robert

2nd Defendant

Choy Siu Fung Rebecca

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Costs Variation Application / Ruling on Applications for Extension of Time and to Amend

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to extend time to file a summons to vary a costs order nisi
  2. 2 Whether a variation of a costs order nisi could be made by letter rather than summons
  3. 3 Whether to allow amendment of the variation summons after significant delay

Ratio Decidendi

The court concluded that Linklaters and YDL deliberately failed to issue a summons within the prescribed time, reliance on a letter and commentary did not excuse the delay, and the unexplained delay caused prejudice; accordingly the application for extension of time to file the variation summons and the subsequent application to amend were dismissed as unjustified and abusive.

Court Disposition

Application to extend time and application to amend dismissed

Orders

  • Dismissed the application for extension of time to file YDL's variation summons
  • Dismissed the application to amend YDL's variation summons