Read the full judgment text of HCCT40/2001 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 20 June 2002 before Hon Ma J in Chambers.
Procedure — Construction and Arbitration Proceedings — Third Party Joinder and Participation — Order 15, rule 6(2)(b) and Order 16, rule 4(4) — Jurisdiction and Exercise of Discretion — Bonds and Counter Indemnity — Construction Contract Security. The plaintiff, a company in liquidation, sued the defendant insurer under a Bond guaranteeing Shing Lee Engineering's performance under a subcontract for school construction. The defendant raised defences and issued a third party claim against Mansion Holdings Ltd under a Counter Indemnity. The third party sought by summons to be joined as a defendant or alternatively to participate fully in the main action. The court held that an existing third party should apply under Order 16, rule 4(4) to participate rather than by joinder under Order 15, rule 6(2)(b). The court recognized the third party's legitimate interest but imposed a balance between procedural fairness and plaintiff’s right to avoid multiplicity of opponents. The third party was allowed to appear, oppose the claim, and cross-examine witnesses but refused further rights to file a defence or evidence absent concrete material. The question of liability between defendant and third party to be tried post main action. Orders included costs and liberty to apply. Third party’s enhanced participation rights were deferred pending future applications with appropriate materials.
Legal issues: The correlation between Order 15, rule 6(2)(b) and Order 16, rule 4 · Extent of the third party's participation in the main action
Outcome: The third party was permitted to appear and oppose the plaintiff's claim and to cross-examine witnesses at trial but was not granted further procedural rights to file defence or evidence without further material.
Cited by 23 cases