Lau, William John v. Wan, Yuk Lin, Alison and Others

Read the full judgment text of HCA 1255/2006 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 12 July 2007.

1. I have considered the latest affidavit of the Plaintiff and the submissions on both sides.  It is true that the Plaintiff did have a right to amend the Writ of Summons before service without leave.  His argument based on such right would have been stronger but for the fact that he wrote the letter dated 12 June 2006 to all 7 Defendants, notifying them of the issue of the writ although he was not serving the same on them.

Cites 1 case

Case No.HCA 1255/2006
Court
High Court CFI
Date12 Jul 2007
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

HCA 1255/2006

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ACTION NO. 1255 OF 2006

____________

BETWEEN

  LAU, WILLIAM JOHN Plaintiff
  and  
  WAN, YUK LIN, ALISON 1st Defendant
  LEE, WAI SHUEN, ANGELA 2nd Defendant
  YAU, WAI KUEN 3rd Defendant
  SKYDON DEVELOPMENT LIMITED 4th Defendant
  CREDIT ON DEMAND LIMITED 5th Defendant
  GREEN TOMATO LIMITED 6th Defendant
  EROS VENTURES LIMITED 7th Defendant

____________

Before: Mr Recorder P Fung, SC in Chambers

Date of Hearing: 12 July 2007

Date of Ruling: 12 July 2007

_______________

R U L I N G

_______________

1.I have considered the latest affidavit of the Plaintiff and the submissions on both sides.  It is true that the Plaintiff did have a right to amend the Writ of Summons before service without leave.  His argument based on such right would have been stronger but for the fact that he wrote the letter dated 12 June 2006 to all 7 Defendants, notifying them of the issue of the writ although he was not serving the same on them.

2.This was in effect like hanging the Sword of Democles over their heads.  As it has turned out, the Plaintiff has now abandoned any claim against the 5th, 6th and 7th Defendants.  Hence, the 5th, 6th and 7th Defendants were justified in launching the strike-out application.  Moreover, the Plaintiff has always accepted that parts of the original Writ of Summons were badly drafted.

3.Taking the broad-brush approach, as I had indicated in my judgment handed down on 22 June 2007, I maintain my original costs order, the order nisi on costs is now made absolute, i.e. it is confirmed.

4.Strictly speaking, this matter could have been dealt with on the last occasion when I was actually in a position to announce my decision but as it turned out I did not do so and reserved judgment.  So if the matter had been dealt with the last time, we would not have needed to come back. Again taking a broad-brush approach, I also order the costs of today to be in the cause.

  (Patrick Fung, SC)
Recorder of the Court of First Instance
of the High Court

The Plaintiff, in person, present

Mr. Chan Pat Lun, instructed by Messrs. Horvath & Giles, for the Defendants