9 Jun 2023
The written Contracts unambiguously named Powertechnic Limited as contractor; the defendant did not prove a mistake of identity or lack of consensus ad idem; PL was entitled to enforce the Contract and recover HK$2,068,088.70 with contractual interest; the defendant's counterclaim for repayment of HK$413,617.74 failed.
3 Sept 2021
Defendant failed to prove the Land was gifted to him and omitted the allegation from pleadings; the plaintiff, as manager of Po Lam Tong with rights passed from Sai Chuk Lam, is entitled to vacant possession; plaintiff's late documents were refused for lack of exceptional circumstances; no mesne profits or loss awarded for lack of evidence/particulars.
26 Jan 2017
All six summons applications lacked legal and factual basis: the pleaded documents were irrelevant or should have been disclosed earlier; technical/expert material could not be admitted without proper authorship or prior disclosure; the asserted omissions and indexing issues did not justify adjourning a fixed trial date; accordingly the summons was dismissed and costs awarded against the plaintiff, to be paid immediately and assessed summarily.
28 Jun 2006
The court admitted the two late documents because they materially affected the plaintiff's medical treatment and prospective losses, but adjourned the trial to avoid unfairness to the 2nd defendant; it ordered a joint medical report within 42 days, permitted further pleadings on damages with short deadlines, directed that the plaintiff pay the 2nd defendant's costs of the adjournment on a party and party basis, and set conditions for relisting the trial.