Kwan Chui Kwok Ying and Another v. Tao Wai Chun and Others
Read the full judgment text of CACV 296/2006 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 31 January 2008.
1. The 6 th defendant’s appeal was dismissed by this Court for lack of jurisdiction.
Cites 1 case
|
CACV 296/2006 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF APPEAL CIVIL APPEAL NO. 296 OF 2006 (ON APPEAL FROM COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE HCMP NO. 2996 OF 1990) ______________________ BETWEEN
THIRD PARTY PROCEEDINGS BETWEEN
______________________ Before : Hon Cheung, Yeung JJA and Chung J in Court Date of 15th Defendant’s written submission : 14 January 2008 Date of 6th Defendant’s written submission : 23 January 2008 Date of Decision : 31 January 2008 ______________________ D E C I S I O N ______________________ Hon Cheung JA (giving decision of the Court) : 1.The 6th defendant’s appeal was dismissed by this Court for lack of jurisdiction. 2.The 6th defendant had previously pursuant to an order dated 9 October 2007 paid into Court $400,000 as security for costs of the appeal. The 15th defendant asked for this sum to be retained pending payment out to him to satisfy his costs of the appeal when taxed. 3.The 6th defendant opposed this and asked for the sum to be paid out to him. He submitted that as the appeal was not properly constituted because leave to appeal was not obtained the order for security should not have been made in the first place. It was therefore an invalid order and the money paid under an invalid order must be returned to him. 4.While we agree that the 15th defendant should earlier have applied to strike out the notice of appeal instead of applying for security for costs of the appeal, the order that was made was nonetheless a valid order and should be given effect. The 6th defendant had not appealed against that order and the time to appeal had long passed. On this basis the money in Court should and can be used to satisfy the 15th defendant’s costs of the appeal. 5.We would order that the $400,000 is to remain in Court until the final determination of the taxation of the 15th defendant’s costs of the appeal. It will then be paid out to the 15th defendant in satisfaction of his taxed costs. The balance, if any, is to be paid out to the 6th defendant.
The 6th defendant, in person Messrs Huen & Partners, for the 15th defendant |
Cases cited in this judgment
Further hearings and rulings under CACV 296/2006