Choy Po Chun v. Choy Po Chun and Another

HCAP7/2010
HCAP9/2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

PROBATE ACTION NO. 7 OF 2010

____________________

------------------------------

BETWEEN

____________________

AND

____________________

-----------------------------

BETWEEN

____________________

Before: The Hon Lam J in Chambers

Date of Hearing: 26 August 2010

Date of Judgment: 26 August 2010

__________________

J U D G M E N T

__________________

1.Granting extension of time for filing pleadings is a case management decision and Mr Au is trying to appeal against the Master’s decision in a case management matter. Moreover, Mr Au had actually informed the Master that he had no objection to the extension and the Master granted the extension accordingly.

2.The only point Mr Au makes this morning which has any substance is about the lack of a summons for extension of time. I do not think it takes him anywhere because, since it is a case management decision, the Master could exercise the discretion on her own motion even without a summons.  For things like this, bearing in mind the history of the matter, since there is a summons to strike out and also a summons for consolidation, I do not think the Master can be criticised for exercising her discretion in this manner.  It is quite usual that these things were done even without any time summons, particularly in light of the indication by Mr Au to the Master that he had no objection to the extension.

3.Since this appeal is utterly hopeless, it should not have been brought in the first place.  I dismiss it unhesitatingly.

(Submissions on costs)

4.I order Mr Au to pay the costs of Madam Choy in this appeal and the costs are to be paid forthwith.  I will fix the costs summarily, by reference to the statement of costs with some deductions on account of some items which I consider to be slightly on the high side.  I will fix the costs summarily at $50,000, pursuant to Order 62 rule (4)(b).  As I said, the costs have to be paid forthwith in the light of the fact that this is an appeal which should never have been brought in the first place.

Representations:

Defendant in HCAP7/2010 and Plaintiff in HCAP9/2010, in person

Mr Kevin Hon, instructed by Gloria Chan & Co., for the 1st Plaintiff in HCAP7/2010 and for the 1st Defendant in HCAP9/2010

2nd Plaintiff in HCAP7/2010 and 2nd Defendant in HCAP9/2010, represented by Yung, Yu, Yuen & Company, excused

Please refer to CACV149/2011, CACV157/2011 & CACV182/2011 for the relevant appeal(s) to the Court of Appeal.

Please refer to CACV149/2011, CACV157/2011 & CACV182/2011 for the relevant appeal(s) to the Court of Appeal.

Please refer to CACV149/2011, CACV157/2011 & CACV182/2011 for the relevant appeal(s) to the Court of Appeal.