Silver Stone Development Ltd and Another v. Lau Kwong Ching, James and Others
Read the full judgment text of CACV 251/2006 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 9 October 2006.
1. This is an application for security for costs on appeal by the 2 nd defendant against the judgment which has been given against a number of defendants. The judgment was for a substantial sum and the other defendants, who are not appealing, have paid, apparently, their share but the 2 nd defendant has paid nothing. He was asked for security for costs back in August and, on the pretext that he has been in Australia and China, he has not provided any reason as to why he should not. Today we a
|
cacv 251/2006 in the high court of the hong kong special administrative region court of appeal civil appeal no. 251 of 2006 (on appeal from HCA NO. 2206 of 2000) BETWEEN
Before: Hon Rogers VP in Chambers Date of Hearing: 9 October 2006 Date of Ruling: 9 October 2006 _________________ R U L I N G _________________ 1.This is an application for security for costs on appeal by the 2nd defendant against the judgment which has been given against a number of defendants. The judgment was for a substantial sum and the other defendants, who are not appealing, have paid, apparently, their share but the 2nd defendant has paid nothing. He was asked for security for costs back in August and, on the pretext that he has been in Australia and China, he has not provided any reason as to why he should not. Today we are faced with an application for an adjournment by his solicitors. I am not prepared to accede to an adjournment. The business of the court would come to a grinding halt if any time anybody was away from Hong Kong for a few days - albeit a businessman who must have a means of communication otherwise - an adjournment is granted. Parties simply cannot expect the court to adjourn matters such as this. 2.In my view, the 2nd defendant should provide security for costs. It is no answer, as his counsel has argued, that even if the 2nd defendant cannot afford the damages, the other defendants can. The other defendants are not appealing this judgment and this is a question of security for costs. 3.The order I propose to make is that:
Mr Chan Pat-lun, instructed by Jesse H Y Kwok & Co., for the 1st Plaintiff/ Respondent Mr Eric Heung, of Messrs Tung, Ng, Tse & Heung, for the 2nd Defendant/ Appellant |
Further hearings and rulings under CACV 251/2006