China Construction Bank (Asia) Corp Ltd v. Shanghai Pudong Development Bank Co Ltd

HCA 1323/2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ACTION NO 1323 OF 2014

____________

____________

______________

D E C I S I O N

______________

1.As should be apparent from a proper reading of my Decision of 11 December 2015, the points raised in paragraph 2 (b) (ii) and (iii) of the draft grounds of appeal were never part of the reasons for the Decision. I am not satisfied that these grounds have any reasonable prospects of success on the proposed appeal.

2.Nor am I satisfied that there are reasonable prospects of success in arguing that I had erred in law, or had misapprehended any facts, or had considered irrelevant matters in concluding that it is sufficient for the defendant to identify a bona fide defence, without the need to investigate the merits of the defence.  Paragraph 1 of the draft grounds of appeal does not disclose any reasonable prospects of success.

3.I am not satisfied that paragraph 4 of the draft grounds of appeal discloses any reasonable prospects of success.  The authorities are clear that cogent evidence is required that justice will be denied to the Plaintiff if the matter should proceed to be tried on the Mainland, and there is no such cogent evidence.  I am not satisfied that I had failed to consider any relevant matter in coming to such conclusion.

4.As for the other grounds stated in the draft Notice of Appeal, the threshold for granting leave is not high, as the prospects of success do not have to be probable.  I will accordingly grant leave in respect of paragraphs 2 (a), (b) (i) and (iv) and 3 of the grounds of appeal, as I am entitled to do under s 14AA(3)(a) of the High Court Ordinance, with costs in the cause of the appeal.

Mr Daniel R Fung SC and Mr Alexander Tang, instructed by Eversheds, for the plaintiff

Mr Ronny Tong SC, instructed by Clyde & Co, for the defendant