Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Admission of late witness statements

Legal area

Court

7 Sept 2020

TSE CHIU v. 郭健 AND OTHERS

Citation

[2020] HKDC 749
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEC1141/2018

The summons to admit the late witness statements was dismissed because the respondents failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the substantial and self-caused delay, the new statements contained substantial new material (including a new witness) that would raise new issues and risk trial disruption and prejudice to the applicant, and the public interest and procedural fairness outweighed prejudice to respondents; the amendment to the Answer was allowed as it did not prejudice preparation of the applicant's case.
8 Oct 2015

HINGONE INVESTMENT CO LTD v. LEUNG TUNG HOI AND ANOTHER

Citation

HINGONE INVESTMENT CO LTD v. LEUNG TUNG HOI AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1119/2011

Both summonses were dismissed: the application for sequential trial was dismissed as improperly constituted, premature and without merit given differing parties and issues; the application to file further witness statements was dismissed as late, contradictory to earlier statements and contrary to confirmations at the PTR; leave to appeal was refused; costs awarded to the plaintiff on an indemnity basis.
16 May 2007

YIU WAH v. SEMK INDUSTRIAL (HOLDINGS) CO LTD

Citation

YIU WAH v. SEMK INDUSTRIAL (HOLDINGS) CO LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA3847/2003

The court exercised its discretion to refuse admission of the two late witness statements because the explanations for delay were unsatisfactory, admission would prejudice the scheduled trial and disrupt the timetable, and the terms offered by the applicants were inadequate; accordingly the trial should proceed without the new statements.
13 Dec 2004

CHAN WING CHEUNG ALLAN v. HO SHUK YEE SUSANA

Citation

CHAN WING CHEUNG ALLAN v. HO SHUK YEE SUSANA
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1941/2000

The judge exercised case management powers to require the defendant to provide a Scott Schedule of full particulars and to limit the trial to six days with allocated times for openings and witnesses, thereby permitting any late materials only subject to those procedural constraints to protect fairness and efficiency.
17 Feb 2003

KAN WYMAN v. NG CHAN CHUEN

Citation

KAN WYMAN v. NG CHAN CHUEN
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA92/1999

The court exercised its discretion to allow the late filing of two factual witness statements and a supplemental expert report and to adjourn the trial because the evidence was important to the merits and fairness of the trial; however, because of the Plaintiff's prior non-compliance and resulting prejudice to the Defendant, the court made the grant conditional on the Plaintiff paying the costs of and those thrown away by the adjournment on a full indemnity basis.
2 Jul 2001

Tam Lup Wai, Franky v. Vong Shi Ming, Nicolas

Citation

Tam Lup Wai, Franky v. Vong Shi Ming, Nicolas
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA358/2001

The judge held that the high relevance of the late witness statements outweighed prejudice to the defendant given they were served about two and a half weeks before trial; therefore permission to file was granted subject to conditions allowing the defendant to file supplemental statements by 9:30 am on the trial date and to renew objections at trial, with the defendant required to place persuasive material before the court if seeking to exclude the witnesses.

Hong Kong Case Law

TSE CHIU v. 郭健 AND OTHERS

HINGONE INVESTMENT CO LTD v. LEUNG TUNG HOI AND ANOTHER

YIU WAH v. SEMK INDUSTRIAL (HOLDINGS) CO LTD

CHAN WING CHEUNG ALLAN v. HO SHUK YEE SUSANA

KAN WYMAN v. NG CHAN CHUEN

Tam Lup Wai, Franky v. Vong Shi Ming, Nicolas