Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Leave to serve

Legal area

Court

25 Aug 2020

RE LEADING GLOBAL FUND SPC

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 2307
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW190/2019

The court adjourned and re-fixed the application because of a recent change in the company's management and legal representation and the parties' agreement to adjourn; costs were reserved. The court endorsed the Re Sunni test that at the leave stage the petitioner need only show a good arguable case on jurisdiction (s327 three core requirements) and a serious issue to be tried on the merits, and noted that in most cases it is preferable to concede leave and decide the substantive petition to avoid duplication.
31 Jul 2020

HO WAI TUNG v. HO FUNG

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 1787
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI1334/2016

The court exercised case management discretion to grant leave in part: it struck out an identified mistaken phrase from the original witness statement, disallowed specified parts of the proposed supplemental statement as inadmissible opinion/speculation/argument, and granted leave to serve a redacted supplemental witness statement within a fixed short deadline while permitting the defendant a right to serve reply witness evidence and seek further expert reports; costs of the summons were ordered to the defendant.
22 Jan 2019

WIN MORE SHIPPING LTD v. DIRECTOR OF MARINE

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 168
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1520/2018

Leave to serve out of the jurisdiction was granted because on the materials the applicant established that BV was a proper party under Rule 1(1)(c), the applicant raised serious issues to be tried and satisfied the applicable requirements of Rule 4(1) and (2); consequently it was appropriate to permit service of the papers on BV out of the jurisdiction in accordance with Rule 5A.
26 May 2011

CHUI PUI KUN v. CHUI WAI KWAN

Citation

CHUI PUI KUN v. CHUI WAI KWAN
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2339/2009

The further witness statements are admissible because they are short, relevant and likely to be challenged as hearsay if not given by the witnesses themselves, but sentences expressing witnesses' opinions that the letters are not defamatory must be deleted because whether words are defamatory in their natural and ordinary meaning is a matter for the jury; costs awarded to defendant as successful party on application.
29 Oct 2010

ANGELA RITA GARDNER v. GRANT THORNTON (a firm) AND ANOTHER

Citation

ANGELA RITA GARDNER v. GRANT THORNTON (a firm) AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2348/2009

Plaintiff failed to plead or provide evidence to show the requisite legal relationship or sufficient connection between Mr Azedo's fraudulent acts and the 2nd defendant's functions (no ordinary course of employment, no pleaded representation for ostensible authority, and no close connection given 2nd defendant's non-client‑facing umbrella role); statements under the 2nd defendant letterhead were forgeries by Azedo and cannot bind the 2nd defendant; consequently there is no good arguable case against the 2nd defendant and the ex parte leave, service and writ as to the 2nd defendant are set asi…
19 May 2010

TO HAY MING v. TO HEI WO

Citation

TO HAY MING v. TO HEI WO
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA315/2009

The court concluded on the evidence that the flat was a gift from the plaintiff's father to the plaintiff, and therefore granted judgment for the plaintiff; the occupation was not adverse possession but either a gift-derived right or by leave of the father and executor; retrospective leave to serve the summons and second affirmation out of jurisdiction was granted.
20 Nov 2008

RAJ KUMAR MAHAJAN v. HCL TECHNOLOGIES (HONG KONG) LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

RAJ KUMAR MAHAJAN v. HCL TECHNOLOGIES (HONG KONG) LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV49/2008

Order 11 must be read by reference to the action as a whole; a local defendant's admission does not preclude the plaintiff pursuing alternative defendants and does not negate the need to consider whether there is a real issue to be tried against out‑of‑jurisdiction defendants; on the facts the plaintiff had shown a serious issue as to identity of employer so leave to serve out of jurisdiction was properly granted; the appeal is dismissed.
31 Jul 2007

PACIFIC ELECTRIC WIRE & CABLE CO LTD v. TEXAN MANAGEMENT LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

PACIFIC ELECTRIC WIRE & CABLE CO LTD v. TEXAN MANAGEMENT LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV369/2006

The court held that material non-disclosure on an ex parte application justifies setting aside the orders but does not automatically bar a renewed application; protection of the court's process, not punitive denial of remedy, governs the response. Given the plaintiffs' undertaking regarding Taiwanese ancillary civil proceedings and the strong connection of the alleged misconduct and assets to Hong Kong, leave to serve the defendants (Mr and Mrs Hu) outside the jurisdiction should be granted and the dismissals set aside; service method to be directed if parties do not agree.
5 Dec 2006

ROBERTSONS (a firm) v. THOMAS JOSEPH DILLON, JR

Citation

ROBERTSONS (a firm) v. THOMAS JOSEPH DILLON, JR
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ2849/2006

The court held that Order 11, rule 9(4) can be interpreted to allow the court to grant leave to serve all future summonses, notices, orders and other documents out of jurisdiction in the course of the present proceedings; accordingly the order of Master Lai was set aside and blanket leave was granted to serve the defendant at the specified addresses by ordinary mail.
18 May 1999

INVESTASIA LTD. AND ANOTHER v. KODANSHA CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER

Citation

INVESTASIA LTD. AND ANOTHER v. KODANSHA CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA12519/1997

The court held Hong Kong was the natural forum because the plaintiffs established a reputation and sufficient connection with Hong Kong and the scale and sensational nature of the publications (including 157 magazine copies in Hong Kong and internet publication) made the complaint substantial; accordingly leave to proceed in respect of torts and damage in Hong Kong was properly available and the defendants' appeals were dismissed.