Shenzhen Universal Enterprises Industry and Trade Co Supplies and Sales Trade Department v. Wei Bun Trading Co Ltd and Others

Case No.CACV 82/1988

Court

Court of Appeal

Date10 Feb 1989

JudgeCons VP, Hunter JA, Mortimer J

Case Document

100%

CACV000082/1988

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL	No.82 of 1988
	(Civil)

BETWEEN
	SHENZHEN UNIVERSAL ENTERPRISES INDUSTRY AND TRADE COMPANY SUPPLIES AND SALES TRADE DEPARTMENT	Plaintiff (Respondant)

	AND

	WEI BUN TRADING COMPANY LIMITED	1st Defendant
		(1st Appellant)
	HO TAT MING, also known as HO TAT MING, BEN and also known as HO TAT MING BENJAMIN	2nd Defendant (2nd Appellant)
	LI TAK SHING, also known as LI TAK SHING, HUBERT	3rd Defendant (3rd Appellant)
	YIP BUN KEUNG, also known as YIP BUN KEUNG, STEPHEN	4th Defendant (4th Appellant)

_______________________

Coram: Hon Cons, V.-P. Hunter, J.A. & Mortimer, J

Date of hearing: 10 February 1989

Date of judgment: 10 February 1989

______________

J U D G M E N T

______________

Hunter, J.A. :

1. This started as an application by the defendants to discharge an order made by this Court on the hearing of an appeal on 16th November 1988 on the basis that the plaintiff "failed to honour its undertaken gave (sic) to the Court of Appeal on 6th November". The application was totally insufficient in form because it did not specify what the undertaking was that had been broken or the breach alleged. That only emerged in a supporting affidavit that was filed some days later.

2. It is unnecessary to go into merits because the application was withdrawn at the outset of the hearing. The only issue which has been argued before us is the costs of the application. On that we say no more for this. The application has wholly failed. We can see no reason at all to depart from the ordinary rule as to costs, that when an application of this nature is launched and fails the applicant pays the costs. We can also see no basis for making any Special or penal order as to costs in the circumstances of this case. So the Court's order is that the application is withdrawn, and the applicant respondents are ordered to pay the plaintiff's costs to be taxed if not agreed.

Representation:

Mr. K M Chong (M/s John M Pickavant & CO) for 1st-4th Applicants/Defendants

Mr. M Bharwaney (M/s Kwan & Kwan) for Respondents/Plaintiffs