Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Extension of time to file evidence

Legal area

Court

18 Nov 2022

WANG SHUITING AND OTHERS v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 3499
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL687/2022

The court granted a stay because there was sufficient overlap between issues in this judicial review and the pending appeal such that awaiting the appeal would better serve the ends of justice and the due administration of justice, and because the LNCs had been lifted with a Restraint Order remaining; however the court refused to defer filing of the Commissioner’s evidence until after the appeal and instead granted a limited 14-day extension for filing to keep the case ready post-appeal; costs of the stay and extension applications were ordered against the Commissioner due to delay and concur…
16 Oct 2020

TRAXYS EUROPE S.A. v. KHINGAN RESOURCES LTD

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 2717
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW186/2020

The court granted leave to file the affirmation in opposition out of time and declined to require payment into court because the delay did not prejudice the petitioner or delay the proceedings; however, the court ordered the company to pay the costs of the 5 October 2020 hearing and the costs of the application on an indemnity basis due to inexcusable mistakes by the company and its solicitors, and emphasised that Rule 32 must be complied with and should be amended to accommodate modern KYC realities.
15 Jan 2018

WEI WEI v. CHI CHIH TONG AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2018] HKDC 55
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI990/2015

Short delay (three days) did not justify permitting fresh evidence in a reply; P Third Affirmation was granted retrospective leave only insofar as it constituted proper reply evidence, but legal submissions and identified fresh factual matters and specific paragraphs were expunged; D2 Affirmation was expunged because interlocutory judgment had been entered against the 2nd defendant, precluding any defence; the court declined to respond to P Second Affirmation as it was not a procedural application under the Rules.
24 Oct 2016

PERFECT DIRECT LTD v. DEJIN RESOURCES GROUP CO LTD

Citation

PERFECT DIRECT LTD v. DEJIN RESOURCES GROUP CO LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW214/2016

The court concluded that the company was self-evidently insolvent, that the new defence (maturity extension) was unlikely to have merit and had already been raised in prior proceedings, and that it was not appropriate to extend time for filing opposition evidence; accordingly a winding-up order should be made.
7 Sept 2015

GLORY SHINING LTD v. PAI CHIA HUI FENICE PROPERTY LTD

Citation

GLORY SHINING LTD v. PAI CHIA HUI FENICE PROPERTY LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2351/2014

The court accepted the unchallenged evidence of the plaintiff's sole director that the sold note and instrument of transfer were not executed by or on behalf of the plaintiff and were therefore invalid; because there was no effective challenge and no useful purpose in granting an extension, the register of members must be rectified to reinstate the plaintiff as the holder of the 3,000 shares and the 1st defendant's request for an extension was refused.

Hong Kong Case Law

WANG SHUITING AND OTHERS v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

TRAXYS EUROPE S.A. v. KHINGAN RESOURCES LTD

WEI WEI v. CHI CHIH TONG AND ANOTHER

PERFECT DIRECT LTD v. DEJIN RESOURCES GROUP CO LTD

GLORY SHINING LTD v. PAI CHIA HUI FENICE PROPERTY LTD