7 Feb 2013
CHEUNG HING v. WONG CHOR CHEUNG
- Citation
- CHEUNG HING v. WONG CHOR CHEUNG
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCMP1828/2011
The originating summons for committal could not succeed because key orders were ambiguous or addressed to the company not the defendant, the Statement failed to provide required particulars (quasi-indictment defect), essential safeguards (proper service, penal notices, service within time for compliance) were not satisfied, and a de facto director cannot be held liable under O.45 r.5(1) on the material before the court; accordingly committal was declined and costs were allocated accordingly.