Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Late applications

Legal area

Court

30 Jan 2024

CHINA MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC. (IN LIQUIDATION) v. WU XIAODONG AND OTHERS

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 278
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1417/2013

The summons was dismissed because the supplemental witness statement was hopelessly late without a full and frank explanation, effectively sought to introduce expert opinion by a partisan factual witness outside the expert directions, and the failure to seek timely expert directions and comply with case management justified exclusion to protect trial management and fairness; costs were awarded against the applicant.
14 Nov 2018

TAO, SOH NGUN v. HSBC INTERNATIONAL TRUSTEE LTD

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 2543
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA355/2018

Summonses to adduce expert evidence were dismissed because the plaintiff offered no satisfactory explanation for extreme lateness, the proposed evidence would cause serious disruption to the fixed trial timetable and prejudice the defendant, and several proposed expert issues were inappropriate (factual, overbroad or not connected to pleaded issues).
25 Nov 2016

INTERPROCOM LTD v. SILVER WINGS TRADING CO LTD

Citation

INTERPROCOM LTD v. SILVER WINGS TRADING CO LTD
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ4383/2012

The court exercised its case management power to allow the late applications because expert evidence on genuineness was material to the central issue, the defendant demonstrated exceptional circumstances and best endeavours to obtain the evidence only recently, and the judge was satisfied that allowing the applications would not cause prejudice to the plaintiff; consequential timetable variations were ordered and costs awarded to the plaintiff for wasted costs.
25 Jun 2014

CHAN YAN CHEONG, THE LAWFUL ATTORNEY OF CHAN YUEN CHOW, THE EXECUTOR UNDER THE WILL OF HO KAM KIU, DECEASED v. CHAN YAN SHUM

Citation

CHAN YAN CHEONG, THE LAWFUL ATTORNEY OF CHAN YUEN CHOW, THE EXECUTOR UNDER THE WILL OF HO KAM KIU, DECEASED v. CHAN YAN SHUM
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ519/2013

The 3rd and 4th summonses were dismissed because they were late, unjustified, and prejudicial, there was no satisfactory explanation to grant indulgence, the applications risked disrupting trial timetables and causing adjournment, and the proposed evidence was inconsistent with existing pleadings and prior statements.
7 Jun 2013

WADDINGTON LTD v. CHAN CHUN HOO THOMAS AND OTHERS

Citation

WADDINGTON LTD v. CHAN CHUN HOO THOMAS AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA3291/2003

The court dismissed the third party discovery summons (Yugang Summons) and the applications for leave to issue subpoenas because the applications were made at a late stage without justification, posed a real risk of derailing the trial and, in the case of the subpoenas, amounted to an abuse of process; costs were awarded against the plaintiff (partly on indemnity basis and partly on party-and-party basis for consistency).

Hong Kong Case Law

CHINA MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC. (IN LIQUIDATION) v. WU XIAODONG AND OTHERS

TAO, SOH NGUN v. HSBC INTERNATIONAL TRUSTEE LTD

INTERPROCOM LTD v. SILVER WINGS TRADING CO LTD

CHAN YAN CHEONG, THE LAWFUL ATTORNEY OF CHAN YUEN CHOW, THE EXECUTOR UNDER THE WILL OF HO KAM KIU, DECEASED v. CHAN YAN SHUM

WADDINGTON LTD v. CHAN CHUN HOO THOMAS AND OTHERS