Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Indorsement of claim

Legal area

Court

29 Apr 2015

TIN SHI ENTERPRISE DEVELOPMENT LTD v. CITY TARGET LTD

Citation

TIN SHI ENTERPRISE DEVELOPMENT LTD v. CITY TARGET LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA180/2015

The plaintiff delayed responding and failed to serve the writ after notice, causing unnecessary interlocutory litigation; by consent the court ordered the defendant to pay HK$6,600,000 into court and vacated the Land Registry memorial and granted procedural leave to plead; the defendant was entitled to the whole costs of the summons and hearing, summarily assessed at HK$242,756 payable forthwith, but indemnity costs were inappropriate because the substantive questions remain undecided and there was no sufficient basis to find conduct deserving indemnity costs.
15 Dec 2011

LAU SHING WAN v. UNIVAN SHIP MANAGEMENT LTD

Citation

LAU SHING WAN v. UNIVAN SHIP MANAGEMENT LTD
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI1617/2010

The Amended Writ lacking the general indorsement was a mere procedural irregularity and not a nullity because the original Writ was validly issued with the indorsement; the irregularity was cured by subsequent service of the Statement of Claim; the claim remained within the limitation period and was not plainly and obviously an abuse of process; accordingly the Master’s order allowing re‑amendment was affirmed and the striking‑out application dismissed.
18 Jan 2008

UDL CONTRACTING LTD v. APPLE DAILY PRINTING LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

UDL CONTRACTING LTD v. APPLE DAILY PRINTING LTD AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1209/2007

Default judgment was irregular because judgment was entered for a liquidated sum notwithstanding the indorsement claimed unliquidated damages; service by leaving the writ at the company's registered office was nonetheless effective; therefore the irregular judgment was set aside as of right and costs allocated: plaintiff to pay 20% of the costs of the set-aside application to the 1st defendant; proceedings against the 1st defendant stayed under section 6 of the Arbitration Ordinance and plaintiff to pay the 1st defendant's costs of the action including the stay application.
22 Jun 2007

LAU, WILLIAM JOHN v. WAN, YUK LIN, ALISON AND OTHERS

Citation

LAU, WILLIAM JOHN v. WAN, YUK LIN, ALISON AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1255/2006

The writ having been validly issued but not served did not amount to abuse; several claims in the indorsement were adequately stated or curable by amendment; defendants acted prematurely instead of using Order 12 r.8A or awaiting statement of claim; therefore the strike‑out order was set aside insofar as it related to defendants 1–5 and the writ validity was extended to 3 July 2007, with costs reserved as costs in the cause.
6 Jun 1991

TONY WONG CHUN LOONG v. JADEMAN (HOLDINGS) LTD. AND OTHERS

Citation

TONY WONG CHUN LOONG v. JADEMAN (HOLDINGS) LTD. AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA5966/1990

The amended indorsement and amended statement of claim disclosed no cause of action: the pleadings failed to show an ulterior predominant purpose necessary for abuse of process and the claimed legal costs do not amount to actionable damage; consequently the amendments and related claims were struck out and the Master's amendment order set aside.

Hong Kong Case Law

TIN SHI ENTERPRISE DEVELOPMENT LTD v. CITY TARGET LTD

LAU SHING WAN v. UNIVAN SHIP MANAGEMENT LTD

UDL CONTRACTING LTD v. APPLE DAILY PRINTING LTD AND ANOTHER

LAU, WILLIAM JOHN v. WAN, YUK LIN, ALISON AND OTHERS

TONY WONG CHUN LOONG v. JADEMAN (HOLDINGS) LTD. AND OTHERS