Sunchase International Group (China) Ltd and Others v. Vincor Group of Companies (Investment) Ltd

CACV64/2004

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 64 OF 2004

(ON APPEAL FROM HCA NO. 1178 OF 1995)

______________________

BETWEEN

(By Original Action)

_______________________

AND BETWEEN

(By Counterclaim)

_______________________

Before:  Hon Rogers VP and Le Pichon JA in Court

Date of Hearing:  10 November 2004

Date of Judgment:  10 November 2004

__________________

J U D G M E N T

__________________

Hon Rogers VP:

1.   This is not a case in which leave should be given under section 22(1)(a).  As has been pointed out, this court is bound by decisions as to whether a judgment is final or interlocutory.  The test which is applied is the applications test.  On that test the matter in dispute in this case does not come within the meaning of ‘final’.

2.   As to the question of discretion, the point as I understand it, put quite simply, is whether it was open to the judge in the court below to dismiss this action for want of prosecution on the basis that there had been a failure to provide security for costs.  In my view it was open to him.  I do not consider that this is a matter of great or general public importance fit for leave to be given to go to the Court of Final Appeal.

Hon Le Pichon JA:

3.   I agree.

Mr Sui See Chun, instructed by Messrs Foo & Li, for the 1st to 3rd Plaintiffs (by Original Action)/Applicants

Mr James Collins, instructed by Messrs Deacons, for the 1st to 3rd Defendants (by Original Action)/Respondents