Ma Po Chim, Percy v. Gock Ping, James and Others

Read the full judgment text of HCMP 3253/2004 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 31 March 2008.

1. I think that there should be an interim payment in relation to Bill Nos.9, 10 and 11.

Cited by 5 cases

Case No.HCMP 3253/2004
Court
High Court CFI
Date31 Mar 2008
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

HCMP 3253/2004

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 3253 OF 2004

____________

  IN THE MATTER of CHUNGSHAN COMMERCIAL ASSOCIATION, HONG KONG (A company limited by guarantee and not having any share capital with word “Limited” being omitted by licence granted by the Registrar of Companies under delegated powers on 25th August, 1967)(香港中山僑商會)
  and  
  IN THE MATTER of Section 168A of the Companies Ordinance, Cap. 32

____________

BETWEEN     

  MA PO CHIM, PERCY(馬寶潛) Petitioners
  GOCK PING, JAMES(郭平)  
  LAM NIN(林年)  
  LI TIN KUEN(李天權)  
  WONG WING NIN(黃永年)  
  MA CHIU WAN(馬超寰)  
  WONG FUNG MING(黃鳳鳴)  
  WONG LAU(黃流)  
    WONG YUI KWONG(黃銳光)  
  LO HING(盧慶)  
  and  
  LEE TUNG HAI, LEO(李東海)  1st Respondent
  PANG SIU WING alias PANG WING
(彭少榮又名彭榮)
2nd Respondent
  CHUNGSHAN COMMERCIAL ASSOCIATION,
HONG KONG
(香港中山僑商會)
(a company limited by guarantee and not having any share capital with word “Limited” being omitted by licence granted by the Registrar of Companies under delegated powers on 25th August 1967)
3rd Respondent
  MO LOONG KWONG 4th Respondent
  LEE DAI CHUNG 5th Respondent
  YUEN CHO MO 6th Respondent

____________

Before: Hon Reyes J in Chambers

Date of Hearing: 31 March 2008

Date of Decision: 31 March 2008

_____________

D E C I S I O N

_____________

1.I think that there should be an interim payment in relation to Bill Nos.9, 10 and 11.

2.Bill No.10 relates to Horwath’s costs of engaging solicitors (Kennedys) to carry out its Court-appointed duties.  In my view, especially in light of the fractious attitude of the members of the Association, it was not only reasonable incidental but also eminently reasonable for the carrying out of Horwath’s duties that it appoint solicitors.  In carrying its work for the Court, Horwath should not have to suffer under an incurred liability to Kennedys as its agents for any substantial period. I am satisfied that Horwath would obtain a significant sum in respect of Kennedys’ fees under Bill No.10.

3.Bill Nos.9 and 11 relate to legal fees awarded to Horwath in connection with various Court applications.  Normally, the Court does not order interim payments of untaxed bills.  But this is not an ordinary case.  Again, as an aspect of carrying out what the Court had directed it to do, Horwath had little option but to engage solicitors and defend against various applications brought by the members of the Association.  I am satisfied that Horwath will obtain a significant sum in respect of these 2 Bills.

4.Mr. Percy Ma makes various vague allegations against Horwaths and Kennedys in an affirmation resisting this application.  I am unable to give such allegations any weight.  Indeed, I am unable to see how such allegations logically affect the present application.  For instance, there is a complaint about the handling of ballot counting by Horwath and Kennedy.  That seems to relate to a single item in Bill No.10 for which some $22,000 is being charged.  That is miniscule in comparison to the total amount being claimed under the 3 Bills.

5.It is suggested that any interim payment should simply be lodged in Court.  This is because it is contended that Horwath will not be able to pay back if only a lesser sum is found to be owing.  In my view, there is no reason to believe that Horwath will somehow be incapable of making restitution in the remote event that I allow a greater interim sum than is ultimately found due following taxation.

6.Accordingly, there will be an order that there be interim payment.  I shall now hear counsel on the details of such an order.

  (A. T. Reyes)
Judge of the Court of First Instance
High Court

Mr Kenneth C L Chan and Mr Dickson T S Fong, instructed by Messrs Peter Mo & Co., for the 3rd Respondent

Ms Sara Tong, instructed by Messrs Kennedys for Horwath Corporate Advisory Services Ltd.