Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Order 16 r.1

  • 10 Aug 2018

    SUPER CRUISE LTD v. COSIMO BORRELLI AND OTHERS

    Citation
    [2018] HKCFI 1854
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA1460/2013

    The Registrar was correct that the Summons as drafted sought to strike out a 'claim' under the wrong rubric; Order 16 r.1 governs third party claims and allows issue‑based joinder such that the absence of privity does not automatically render a third party pleading disclosable of no reasonable cause. The TPSOC pleaded arguable bases for indemnity/contribution not exclusively contractual, so it is not a plain and obvious case to strike out; amendment to reframe the Summons was refused as untimely and without merit. Appeal dismissed.

  • 25 Jul 1985

    PURETON CO (a firm) v. B.K. REKHATEX (HK) LTD

    Citation
    PURETON CO (a firm) v. B.K. REKHATEX (HK) LTD
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA324/1985

    The proposed third party proceedings did not fall within Order 16 r.1 because there was no claim for contribution or indemnity and no sufficient nexus between the bank's letter of credit transaction and the dispute between Pureton and B.K.R.; alternatively the court would refuse to exercise its discretion to allow third party proceedings because they would cause gross inconvenience, require adding many parties and duplicate a separate pending action between the bank and B.K.R.; accordingly Master O'Donnell's Order and the Third Party Notice were set aside.