William Teh Yee Lee t/a Hongkong Kowloon First Securities Co v. The Nikko Securities Co (Asia) Ltd
Read the full judgment text of HCA 3612/1983 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 4 January 1984.
1. In this application, I am concerned with three actions to each of which Nikko Securities are the defendant. It is their application to have them consolidated. It is conceded by Mr. Kwok who appears for the plaintiff that in the first and third of the actions, the issues are the same in all essentials. In both actions, the plaintiff claims that money in one instance and money and gold in the other are due to it by virtue of an account between it and the defendant in which the defendant has act
|
HCA003612/1983
BETWEEN
_____
AND BETWEEN
_____ And Between
_____
AND BETWEEN
_____ Coram: Hon. Mantell J. in Chambers Date of Hearing: 4 January 1984 Date of Decision: 4 January 1984 _________ DECISION _________ 1. In this application, I am concerned with three actions to each of which Nikko Securities are the defendant. It is their application to have them consolidated. It is conceded by Mr. Kwok who appears for the plaintiff that in the first and third of the actions, the issues are the same in all essentials. In both actions, the plaintiff claims that money in one instance and money and gold in the other are due to it by virtue of an account between it and the defendant in which the defendant has acted as broker to the plaintiff and Mr. Kwok has advanced no reason why those two actions should not be consolidated and I so direct. 2. The real issue arises in relation to the second and much more substantial action. There are four plaintiffs, but the defendant has a counterclaim in which it seeks damages against the four plaintiffs and three others. One of the three others, although going by the name of H.K. Kowloon First Securities Company, is in reality none other than the plaintiff in acions one and three. Now, it is necessary, before an application of this kind can or should be allowed, following the principle enunciated by Lord Justice Pearson citing the judgment of Lord Sterndale M.R. in Payne v. British Time Recorder Ltd. and W.W. Curtis Ltd., (1) for there to be some common question of law or fact bearing sufficient importance in proportion to the rest of the action to render it desirable that the whole of the matters should be disposed of at the same time. Had it been necessary for me to make such a finding I would have found that such a connection does exist between all three actions. But upon being referred to the pleadings it appears to me that all the substantial issues between the several parties to these three actions will be disposed of when action no.2 is heard and concluded and for that reason, it is only necessary for me to order that that actions one and three be consolidated but that they be stayed until after the hearing and conclusion of action no.2. 3. Costs in the cause with certificate for two counsel.
(1) [1921] 2 K.B. 1, 16 Representation: Lester Kwok instructed by Hastings & Co. for plaintiff in H C.A. No. 11152 of 1982. Martin Lee, Q.C. & Edward Chan instructed by Woo, Kwan, Lee & Lo for defendant in H.C.A. No. 11152 of 1982. Ronny Wong instructed by Johnson, Stokes & Master for plaintiffs in HCA No. 11790 of 1982. Martin Lee, Q.C. & Edward Chan instructed by Woo, Kwan, Lee & Lo for defendant in H.C.A. No. 11790 of 1982. Martin Lee, Q.C. & Edward Chan instructed by Woo, Kwan, Lee & Lo for plaintiff by counterclaim in H.C.A. No. 11790 of 1982. Ronny Wong instructed by Johnson, Stokes & Master for 1st to 5th defendants by counterclaim in H.C.A. No. 11790 of 1982. Lester Kwok instructed by Hastings & Co. for 7th defendant by counterclaim in H.C.A. No. 11790 of 1982. Lester Kwok instructed by Hastings & Co. for plaintiff in H.C.A. No. 3612 of 1983. Martin Lee, Q.C. & Edward Chan instructed by Woo, Kwan, Lee & Lo for defendant in H.C.A. No. 3612 of 1983. |