Read the full judgment text of FAMV 000030/2000 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.