24 Jul 1992
BOUYGUES S A AND OTHERS v. RED SEA INSURANCE LTD.
- Citation
- BOUYGUES S A AND OTHERS v. RED SEA INSURANCE LTD.
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Case number
- CACV3/1992
The Court held the judge's order dismissing the counterclaim should be set aside because the proposed amendment did not introduce a new cause of action but sought to plead the same substantive claim on the basis of Saudi law and therefore fell within Limitation Ordinance s35 and Order 20 r5; Dicey sub-rule (2) relaxing choice of law is not part of Hong Kong law so the proposed 'direct' cause of action based solely on that sub-rule was unsustainable, but the 'indirect' cause (insurer enforcing insureds' rights under Saudi law) could not be denied at strike out and should be permitted to be adv…