Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Case management and directions

Legal area

Court

29 Apr 2021

RE CHINA GREENFRESH GROUP CO, LTD

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 1257
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW213/2020

Where a subsequent winding-up petition is clearly improperly presented the court should dismiss it; where there are extenuating circumstances the court should order removal from the court file. Costs are to be determined by the court's discretion having regard to the conduct of the parties and their solicitors; muddled conduct may justify no order as to costs. Applying these principles: HCCW 83/2020 adjourned with directions; HCCW 187/2020 removed from the court file with no order as to costs; HCCW 213/2020 dismissed with no order as to costs.
26 Jul 2017

YIP KUI FUNG KENNETH v. YIP TSZ KWAN IRENE AND OTHERS

Citation

YIP KUI FUNG KENNETH v. YIP TSZ KWAN IRENE AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2163/2016

The court refused to allow the plaintiff to raise section 56 at the hearing because reliance on that statutory power was not pleaded in the originating summons or stated in the affirmations with the facts required to meet the legal tests; permitting the point would prejudice the other parties and impede fair disposal, so the proper course is amendment and sequential filing of evidence.
12 Aug 2016

WU YANG v. DAYUAN INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

WU YANG v. DAYUAN INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW103/2015

The court held it was not 'plain and obvious' that the pleadings or actions would fail on the material available and declined to strike out or stay the Petition; the Rectification Proceedings and the Petition were ordered to be heard together with specified directions and timetable; costs of the New Bright parties' stay application were ordered to be costs in the cause and costs of the strike out applications were ordered to be the 2nd to 6th respondents' costs in the cause, with attendance costs for the 1st, 2nd and 7th respondents to be costs in the cause.
5 Oct 2012

HARVON LIMITED AND ANOTHER v. DAYS PROPERTIES LTD

Citation

HARVON LIMITED AND ANOTHER v. DAYS PROPERTIES LTD
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ4720/2011

On the totality of the interlocutory evidence the defendant had raised a credible triable issue because the coloured water tests were inconclusive and the joint thermographic report was not definitive; accordingly summary judgment and mandatory injunction were not justified and the defendant was granted unconditional leave to defend, with detailed case management directions to prepare the matter for trial.
18 Sept 2009

WAH NAM GROUP LTD (In Liquidation) AND ANOTHER v. INSIGNIA BROOKE (HONG KONG) LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

WAH NAM GROUP LTD (In Liquidation) AND ANOTHER v. INSIGNIA BROOKE (HONG KONG) LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA661/2004

The court found the plaintiffs were not guilty of inordinate or inexcusable delay; the steps taken to obtain witness evidence justified the period of activity; any prejudice to the 1st defendant was not shown to be such as to make a fair trial impossible; limitation and non‑compliance arguments did not warrant striking out on the material before the court; accordingly the summons to strike out for want of prosecution was dismissed and costs were to follow the event with an order nisi in favour of the plaintiffs for the application costs.
18 Sept 2007

ALVAREZ & MARSAL ASIA LTD v. NICHOLAS TIMOTHY CORNFORTH HILL

Citation

ALVAREZ & MARSAL ASIA LTD v. NICHOLAS TIMOTHY CORNFORTH HILL
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2461/2006

The court exercised its case management discretion and refused to direct that the adjourned hearing must be heard only by Poon J: prior mention of a judge on orders or notices does not oblige future listing; the benefit of potential continuity with a single judge did not outweigh the risk of delay and the need for an earlier hearing by any available companies judge.
23 Sept 2003

RE BONDFIELD INTERNATIONAL LTD

Citation

RE BONDFIELD INTERNATIONAL LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW99/2002

The court exercised case management discretion and directed a single consolidated hearing at which oral evidence and cross-examination will be heard to resolve the factual conflicts central to the liquidators' summons (including alleged approval of the HGSL–RSM arrangement), rather than determining the strike out application on paper; the court acknowledged a two-stage process may suit discrete s.204 examinations but found a single hearing necessary and more efficient to determine the contested summonses and related issues.
28 Mar 2001

SIS INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS LTD. v. CHS ELECTRONICS, INC.

Citation

SIS INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS LTD. v. CHS ELECTRONICS, INC.
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP7341/1999

The master should not have directed conversion to a writ and given consequential directions without hearing full argument because the defendant's stay application for arbitration ought to be determined first; accordingly the master's order converting the originating summons and related directions (save limited exceptions) were set aside and the matter adjourned for full argument before a judge.