Bright Shipping Ltd v. Changhong Group (HK) Ltd
Read the full judgment text of HCAJ 3/2018 on BabelCite. This HCAJ judgment was delivered on 25 February 2019.
1. I believe that the short delay by the Defendant in making this leave application is largely attributable to its erroneous belief that the Order to be appealed is a final order. I hold that the short delay is excusable.
Cites 1 case
|
HCAJ 3/2018 [2019] HKCFI 542 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE ADMIRALTY ACTION NO. 3 OF 2018 ___________________________
___________________________
________________ D E C I S I O N ________________ 1.I believe that the short delay by the Defendant in making this leave application is largely attributable to its erroneous belief that the Order to be appealed is a final order. I hold that the short delay is excusable. 2.Despite Mr Luxton’s able submissions, I believe that the intended appeal has reasonable prospects of success, which is not a particularly high threshold. The existence of parallel proceedings in different jurisdictions can be an important consideration in an application for stay of proceedings on the ground of forum non conveniens, and there is some substance in the contention that the correct approach by the court in the application of the principles deserves another visit by the Court of Appeal. 3.I therefore grant leave to appeal.
Mr Nick Luxton, instructed by Holman Fenwick Willan, for the Plaintiff Mr Edward Alder, instructed by Reed Smith Richards Butler, for the Defendant | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Cases cited in this judgment
Further hearings and rulings under HCAJ 3/2018