Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Summary account

  • 4 Mar 2009

    IRONWOOD CAPITAL LTD v. KTH CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LTD

    Citation
    IRONWOOD CAPITAL LTD v. KTH CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LTD
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA2836/2004

    The court held that producing bank statements alone does not satisfy the summary account order; the defendant, being an accounting party in respect of monies invested from the ABN Account, must replace Exhs WD2-WD7 with a proper summary account detailing movements between the ABN Account and the Sub-Account, investments made on behalf of the plaintiff and monies returned, in accordance with paragraph 1(A)–(D) of the 20 November 2007 order within 28 days. Given partial compliance and effort by the defendant, an 'unless' order was not warranted; consequential procedural relief and a costs nisi…

  • 5 Aug 2008

    IRONWOOD CAPITAL LTD v. KTH CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LTD

    Citation
    IRONWOOD CAPITAL LTD v. KTH CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LTD
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA2836/2004

    Leave to serve the proposed interrogatories was refused because they were framed in an unduly general and all‑encompassing way, were premature before the plaintiff filed any list of objections to the defendant's summary account, were not confined to the issues that could be identified on the pleadings or by the summary account process, and would not be necessary or cost‑saving but would generate unnecessary costs.

  • 16 May 2008

    IRONWOOD CAPITAL LTD AND OTHERS v. WANG DU AND OTHERS

    Citation
    IRONWOOD CAPITAL LTD AND OTHERS v. WANG DU AND OTHERS
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA76/2005

    The Master properly exercised his discretion: at the interlocutory stage the court must not resolve disputed factual issues or conduct a merits trial; the plaintiffs' consent to amendments to the defence and subsequent discovery removed their previously strongest point and left issues to be tried; therefore additional security of $1,000,000 (Accounts Action) and $1,500,000 (Recovery Action) was justified and the Master's order should stand.

  • 16 May 2008

    IRONWOOD CAPITAL LTD v. KTH CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LTD

    Citation
    IRONWOOD CAPITAL LTD v. KTH CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LTD
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA2836/2004

    The appeal was dismissed because the Master did not err in exercising his discretion: the plaintiffs had consented to amendments that removed their strongest interlocutory point, discovery and defendants' explanations undermined the asserted strength of plaintiffs' case, and merits cannot be determined at interlocutory stage absent a very high probability of success; accordingly additional security for costs was properly ordered.

  • 20 Nov 2007

    IRONWOOD CAPITAL LTD v. KTH CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LTD

    Citation
    IRONWOOD CAPITAL LTD v. KTH CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LTD
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA2836/2004

    Where the defendant expressly accepted it was an accounting party and the pleaded factual disputes did not go to whether an account should be ordered, the court must exercise its discretion to order summary accounts pre-trial; defendant must render verified accounts and permit objections to be filed so detailed disputes can be determined at trial. The application was not an abuse of process and delay did not bar the exercise of discretion.