Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Consequential amendments

Legal area

Court

18 Oct 2016

KAISER 2000 LTD v. WEALTHY VANTAGE LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

KAISER 2000 LTD v. WEALTHY VANTAGE LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA85/2013

The court disallowed the specified amendments because they were not consequential upon the Amended Statement of Claim as authorised by the consent order; amendments based on late discovery or unrelated factual material cannot be justified as consequential and may cause unfair prejudice if introduced by pleading rather than by evidence or cross-examination.
18 Oct 2016

KWAN KWOK KI v. TANG SHING BOR AND ANOTHER

Citation

KWAN KWOK KI v. TANG SHING BOR AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1465/2012

The contested paragraphs of the Re-Amended Defence were disallowed because they were not consequential upon Kwan's Amended Statement of Claim as permitted by the consent order; matters rooted in alleged late discovery are not properly the subject of consequential pleadings and, if appropriate, may be pursued at cross-examination but not by the impugned amendments.
5 Jul 2016

KUDETA LTD AND OTHERS v. CHRIS AU AND OTHERS

Citation

KUDETA LTD AND OTHERS v. CHRIS AU AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2063/2015

The judge exercised discretion to allow the plaintiffs to amend their pleadings because the amendments clarified and narrowed issues without introducing new issues, abridged time for service and dispensed with service of the amended documents, set specific and shorter time limits for consequential amendments (28 days) and for experts' engagement, and allocated costs against specified parties as set out in the order.

Hong Kong Case Law

KAISER 2000 LTD v. WEALTHY VANTAGE LTD AND OTHERS

KWAN KWOK KI v. TANG SHING BOR AND ANOTHER

KUDETA LTD AND OTHERS v. CHRIS AU AND OTHERS