Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Construction of consent orders

Legal area

Court

20 Apr 2021

WGL v. ASB

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 1008
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP489/2013

Mother remains responsible for payment of ILB's ECAs out of the existing monthly budget because Father failed to discharge the burden to justify any reduction; 'return airfare' in paragraph 3(i)(b) of the Custody/Coleridge Order means the round‑trip fare between Hong Kong and the place of access (HK/place of access/HK) and Father was obliged to pay such return business class fares on production of invoices; there was insufficient evidence that any airfare invoices were fabricated or that Mother had not paid; accordingly both the ECA Summons and paragraph 2 of the Reimbursement Summons are dis…
29 Jan 2015

YU ZHONGMIN v. SINODRAGON MARITIME LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

YU ZHONGMIN v. SINODRAGON MARITIME LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1813/2014

The consent order must be read to limit the scope of the court-ordered meeting to matters directed by the order; the plaintiff attended the 7 July meeting and therefore it was not inquorate so article 56 could not properly be invoked to adjourn to a different time; the adjourned meeting on 14 July 2014 was held at a different time and on a notice that did not disclose the appointment resolution and is therefore invalid; accordingly the resolutions and the purported appointment of Tian Yuchen are null and void.
30 Sept 2013

HO SIN YING v. CHAN YUI LING AND ANOTHER

Citation

HO SIN YING v. CHAN YUI LING AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1531/2012

The 2012 consent order undertaking not to commence "another action based on the same cause of action" must be construed in its factual background and was intended to prevent the plaintiff from pursuing further actions arising from the same factual matrix; the present action, though couched in different causes of action, arises from the same facts and is caught by the undertaking and thus constitutes an abuse of process. Independently, the pleaded causes are defective and, insofar as they allege breaches occurring before the deceased's death, are time-barred under Cap 347. Leave to re-amend wa…
10 May 2013

KOWLOON DEVELOPMENT FINANCE LTD v. PENDEX INDUSTRIES LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

KOWLOON DEVELOPMENT FINANCE LTD v. PENDEX INDUSTRIES LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FACV21/2012

The appeal is dismissed: the Tomlin consent orders, read against their factual background, did not discharge the post-2005 indebtedness and the 2005 order was properly rectified on the grounds of common mistake; the facts also supported rectification for unilateral mistake and there is no requirement to elect exclusively between the two doctrines where they address distinct legal questions.
4 May 2012

HARTANTO HADY v. RADNAABAZAR BAZAR

Citation

HARTANTO HADY v. RADNAABAZAR BAZAR
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA89/2008

Leave to appeal out of time granted; Appeal allowed; Master de Souza's order setting aside ex parte leave was set aside because the court found Hong Kong to be the clearly and distinctly appropriate forum (contracts governed by Hong Kong law, entered into in Hong Kong and requiring Hong Kong rules of construction) and there was no material non-disclosure by the Plaintiff that would have affected the ex parte leave decision; the Consent Order did not operate to confer unquestioned jurisdiction such that the setting aside application was academic.
22 May 1998

BALSAM LTD. v. CHAU CHI NUNG AND OTHERS

Citation

BALSAM LTD. v. CHAU CHI NUNG AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA5626/1994

The undertaking in the Tomlin consent order was tied to the Plaintiffs legal interest as distributor of F & N products; because the Plaintiff ceased to be an authorised F & N distributor on 30 August 1996 and thus had no legal interest remaining to protect, the court discharged the undertaking as against the 1st, 3rd and 4th Defendants and ordered costs nisi to be paid by the Plaintiff.
8 Jan 1992

RE YUN JIP AUTO SERVICES LTD.

Citation

RE YUN JIP AUTO SERVICES LTD.
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW84/1990

Although 'sell' and 'purchase' prima facie mean transfer for money, the consent order must be construed as a whole and contains an express fall-back (paragraph 12) for winding-up where the proposed purchase does not occur; a nil valuation does not preclude operation of paragraph 12, and doctrines of election/estoppel and frustration do not prevent the court giving effect to the winding-up provision; accordingly the court ordered the company wound up and Official Receiver appointed.
27 Feb 1991

MIOKO SAKURADA LOUVET v. LOUIS ARISTIDE CHARLES LOUVET AND OTHERS

Citation

MIOKO SAKURADA LOUVET v. LOUIS ARISTIDE CHARLES LOUVET AND OTHERS
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV132/1990

The appeal was allowed: Barnett J's order of 6 August 1990 was set aside because MCD had filed evidence under Rule 74(4) and therefore the woman named's successful appeal did not determine MCD's position; furthermore the June 15, 1990 letter was too vague to convert a bare liberty to apply into a liberty to discharge the Consent Order, and consent orders cannot be discharged absent appropriate grounds.