Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Late application

Legal area

Court

14 Oct 2024

PACIFIC ACE FINANCE LTD v. DELAY, GILDA H. AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2024] HKDC 1735
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3298/2018

The summonses were dismissed because the applications were made late with inadequate explanations for the delay, the sought documents were not relevant to the defendant's pleaded defence (which disputed only the dates, not the existence or contents of the promissory notes), and there was insufficient merit to justify ordering production; costs were awarded to the plaintiff.
30 Jan 2024

CHINA MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC (IN LIQUIDATION) AND OTHERS v. WU XIAODONG AND OTHERS

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 278
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA3391/2016

D3's Summons was dismissed because the supplemental statement (Chen 2) is a late, unexplained attempt to introduce expert opinion disguised as factual evidence; the applicant failed to justify the delay or seek expert directions earlier and admission would undermine case management and prejudice other parties.
7 Sept 2023

SEK MAN LAI v. WILLIAM ENGINEERING LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2023] HKDC 1251
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI3266/2019

The summons was dismissed because the plaintiff and his assigned solicitor caused inordinate and unexplained delays in bringing the application, producing real prejudice to defendants and risking adjournment of a fixed trial date; costs were ordered to defendants on an indemnity basis with a costs order nisi against the assigned solicitor to show cause why he should not pay wasted costs.
7 Mar 2023

TANG HIN FAI AND ANOTHER v. TANG HIN LUNG AND OTHERS

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 724
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1610/2017

The summons was dismissed because the 2nd defendant failed to give a good explanation for the very late application, the order would cause real prejudice and distraction to the plaintiffs with insufficient time to investigate or call witnesses before trial, and the probative value and utility of the records were doubtful such that the court in its discretion refused to order disclosure.
12 Oct 2020

CHINA FORESTRY HOLDINGS CO LTD (IN OFFICIAL LIQUIDATION)AND OTHERS v. KPMG (a firm)

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 2614
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCL9/2019

Both the Discovery Summons and Authenticity Summons were dismissed: the court held that (1) the bulk of the discovery sought was not shown to be sufficiently relevant or necessary at the late interlocutory stage and was overly broad and oppressive; (2) interview notes and related materials were, to the extent claimed, protected by litigation privilege given the liquidators' dominant purpose of investigating and pursuing claims; and (3) requiring Plaintiffs to identify inauthentic documents among the voluminous disclosure would impose an undue and impractical burden and improperly reverse the…
16 Nov 2015

CHEUNG MAN KOK v. CHAN YEE LING ELAINE

Citation

CHEUNG MAN KOK v. CHAN YEE LING ELAINE
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI1665/2011

Defendant failed to make out a prima facie case for further psychiatric expert evidence because existing treating psychiatrists' and psychologist's reports, together with the second plaintiff's acceptance that those reports and diagnoses would not be challenged if the defendant's complaints are found truthful, meant additional forensic evidence was unnecessary; the application was very late, unjustified and would cause substantial delay and prejudice, therefore leave to adduce further psychiatric evidence was refused and the appeal dismissed.
30 Jul 2014

WOO HOI LUN AND OTHERS v. LAI YUNG

Citation

WOO HOI LUN AND OTHERS v. LAI YUNG
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ2312/2012

Leave was granted because the proposed amendment raised a purely legal point (lack of consideration), required no new evidence, the matters were already within the Agreed Statement of Issues, and the amendment would not materially prejudice or derail the imminent trial apart from costs; accordingly the court exercised its discretion to allow filing within 14 days and ordered costs.
5 Jul 2013

SINGH, HARJIT v. VSL HONG KONG LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

SINGH, HARJIT v. VSL HONG KONG LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI153/2012

The Master allowed the late amendments because the proposed changes were arguable and relevant to a just resolution, the evidence was not new to defendants and caused no real prejudice, the delay was limited and did not disrupt the assessment, and the substantive issues (exclusion of months, notional earnings, multiplier, PSLA) were matters properly left for determination at the assessment hearing; however costs consequences flow to the applicant for making a late application.
3 Jun 2013

SIDEPEC INTERNATIONAL LTD v. CHEUNG HING

Citation

SIDEPEC INTERNATIONAL LTD v. CHEUNG HING
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA829/2010

Although the application was late and the explanation for delay was unimpressive, the proposed amendments and supplemental evidence were sufficiently relevant to the defendant's counterclaim and the defendant could reasonably respond within the available time without derailing the trial; accordingly discretion should be exercised to grant leave subject to timetable conditions and costs against the plaintiff.
13 Dec 2012

LI SHIU TO v. LI SHIU TSANG AND OTHERS

Citation

LI SHIU TO v. LI SHIU TSANG AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA416/2003

Balancing the deterrent rationale in Lessy SARL against the plaintiff's substantial delay, late concessions, misleading representation to Master Ho and resulting prejudice to the defendants, the court exercised its discretion to refuse to order the 1st and 3rd defendants to pay the costs of the substantive hearings and the costs of the variation application, while maintaining that the costs of and occasioned by the amendments and the amendment summons be paid by the plaintiff to the 1st and 3rd defendants and the plaintiff's own costs be taxed under the Legal Aid Regulations.