Ho Kwok Wah v. Group Brothers Ltd. and Another
Read the full judgment text of FAMV 30/2000 on BabelCite. This FAMV judgment was delivered on 19 December 2000 before Bokhary PJ, Chan PJ, Ribeiro PJ.
1. It is contended on the applicant's behalf that the respondents have "stolen a march" on the company and on him. We see no basis for that, and it is off the point. The point is simply this. A company of which the applicant is a shareholder was sued for a sum of money which it undisputably owed. Default judgment was obtained against the company. Service had been effected on the company at its registered office. We are unable to see how the Court of Appeal can be faulted for regarding such servi
Legal issues: Regularity of service of default judgment · Standing of shareholder to challenge judgment against company
Outcome: Application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal refused.
|
FAMV000030/2000 FAMV No. 30 of 2000 IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 30 OF 2000 (CIVIL) (ON APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL _____________________
_____________________ Appeal Committee: Mr Justice Bokhary PJ, Mr Justice Chan PJ and Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ Date of Hearing: 19 December 2000 Date of Determination: 19 December 2000 __________________________ DETERMINATION __________________________ Mr Justice Bokhary PJ: 1. It is contended on the applicant's behalf that the respondents have "stolen a march" on the company and on him. We see no basis for that, and it is off the point. The point is simply this. A company of which the applicant is a shareholder was sued for a sum of money which it undisputably owed. Default judgment was obtained against the company. Service had been effected on the company at its registered office. We are unable to see how the Court of Appeal can be faulted for regarding such service as regular. In any event, the applicant has no legal cause for complaint, whether derived from the company or independently on his own, against the judgment which is for payment of an undisputed debt. The application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal is refused. 2. Mr Hung, I assume that you ask for costs and that you, Mr Chain, do not oppose costs? [Mr Hung: Yes Mr Chain: Not opposed] With costs.
Representation: Mr Benjamin Chain & Mr Au Yeung Kwan (instructed by Messrs Gary Mak, Dennis Wong & Chang) for the applicant Mr Samson Hung (instructed by Messrs Dominic Y.K. Lai & Co.) for the respondents |