Read the full judgment text of HCCT000012A/1997 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 11 February 1999 before The Hon Mr Justice Findlay.
Applications for further and better particulars within a civil proceeding in the High Court (Court of First Instance), concerning the obligations of defendants and third party to clarify allegations. The first defendant argued it was not pursuing some allegations but the court clarified that a failure to receive particulars from the second defendant did not imply abandonment. The court ordered specific particulars to be provided within prescribed deadlines, subject to confirmations of abandonment. On costs, the court rejected first defendant’s arguments that previous orders or communication excused non-provision and ordered costs against the first and second defendants in favour of the plaintiff, and costs against the third party in favour of the first defendant. This judgment clarifies procedural obligations on particulars and costs consequences in interlocutory applications.
Legal issues: Request for further and better particulars · Costs of particulars applications
Outcome: The first and second defendants are ordered to provide specified particulars; the third party is ordered to provide specified particulars; costs ordered with the first and second defendants to pay plaintiff’s costs and third party to pay first defendant’s costs.