Read the full judgment text of CACV 000097/1990 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 5 October 1990 before Fuad, V-P, Kempster, JA and Nazareth, J.
Civil procedure – striking out – motion vs summons – interlocutory relief – Court of Appeal – Hong Kong – Rules of the Supreme Court Order 32 rule 11 – Order 8 – Supreme Court Ordinance Cap 4 s.12(2)(a) – s.13(2) – no rule precluding notice of motion for interlocutory matters – judge erred in dismissing motions – motive irrelevant – proper remedy costs order – appeals allowed – motions restored for hearing
Legal issues: Propriety of striking out applications by motion
Outcome: Appeals allowed; orders dismissing the applications set aside; motions restored for hearing before a judge of the High Court.