Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Necessary and proper party

Legal area

Court

28 Mar 2022

VER, ROGER KEITH v. OKEX FINTECH CO LTD (formerly known as KIND CASTLE TRADING LTD) AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2022] HKCA 468
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV630/2020

The appeal was allowed because the defendants' final, detailed undertaking of 9 February 2022 removed any live issue about the Version 8 Agreement and thereby removed any practical basis for maintaining the 2nd defendant as a necessary or proper party; accordingly the Court set aside the order granting leave to serve the 2nd defendant out of the jurisdiction under RHC O.11 r.1(1)(c) and (d)(iii).
14 Jul 2021

ANGLO CHINESE CORPORATE FINANCE, LTD v. APASTRON CAPITAL LTD (in liquidation)

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 2042
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW290/2020

Leave was granted because on a balancing exercise it was right and fair to allow continuation: both parties consented, the company was a necessary and proper party to multi-defendant litigation involving complex disputed facts that the court must determine, and leaving those issues to the liquidator risked inconsistent decisions and unfairness.
8 Sept 2020

VER, ROGER KEITH v. OKEX FINTECH CO LTD (formerly known as KIND CASTLE TRADING LTD) AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 2335
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2439/2016

None of the defendants' grounds for leave to appeal were arguable: the fraud/deceit point did not negate the contract gateway for service out; there was a live lis between plaintiff and D1 revived on grant of conditional leave to defend (therefore service out was appropriately reconsidered); D2 is a necessary and proper party because the forgery dispute affects the contractual claim; the defendants' undertaking did not amount to a binding written admission under Order 27. Consequently leave to appeal was refused and the defendants' summons dismissed with costs.
7 Feb 2012

TOTAL LUBRICANTS HONG KONG AND ANOTHER v. CHRISTOPHE DE LA CROPTE DE CHANTERAC AND OTHERS

Citation

TOTAL LUBRICANTS HONG KONG AND ANOTHER v. CHRISTOPHE DE LA CROPTE DE CHANTERAC AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1694/2008

The court allowed the plaintiffs' application to re-amend the amended statement of claim because the proposed re-pleading properly pleaded an unlawful means conspiracy satisfying the required elements, the 5th defendant (GOML) is a necessary and proper party to that conspiracy even if it did not independently commit the alleged unlawful acts (following Total Network), the previous dismissal had been for defective pleading and did not bar a properly formulated claim, and delay or prejudice did not justify striking out where compensation by costs or interest could address prejudice.
19 Oct 1995

ARABIAN AMERICAN INSURANCE CO. (BAHRAIN) E.C. v. GRAND UNION INSURANCE CO. LTD. and Another

Citation

ARABIAN AMERICAN INSURANCE CO. (BAHRAIN) E.C. v. GRAND UNION INSURANCE CO. LTD. and Another
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCL45/1995

The application is dismissed because the Second Defendant is a proper and necessary party and the fact that the First Defendant is in liquidation or may be unable to satisfy a judgment does not, without additional substantial factors, render the proceedings not bona fide or justify setting aside leave to serve out of the jurisdiction.

Hong Kong Case Law

VER, ROGER KEITH v. OKEX FINTECH CO LTD (formerly known as KIND CASTLE TRADING LTD) AND ANOTHER

ANGLO CHINESE CORPORATE FINANCE, LTD v. APASTRON CAPITAL LTD (in liquidation)

VER, ROGER KEITH v. OKEX FINTECH CO LTD (formerly known as KIND CASTLE TRADING LTD) AND ANOTHER

TOTAL LUBRICANTS HONG KONG AND ANOTHER v. CHRISTOPHE DE LA CROPTE DE CHANTERAC AND OTHERS

ARABIAN AMERICAN INSURANCE CO. (BAHRAIN) E.C. v. GRAND UNION INSURANCE CO. LTD. and Another